656 Comments »

1. Whitney said,

   October 21, 2008 @ 4:10 pm

   I would think that especially if a group owner is absent and his email is bouncing, there should be a way to “express” a new owner, rather than having to jump through a lot of these hoops. I like the idea of a path should the owner simply be inactive, but available via email, but when he’s gone, he’s gone.

2. Lea said,

   October 21, 2008 @ 4:11 pm

   How would you know that an owner has abandoned their group? I think maybe have a reporting tool of some sort whereby a member can report an owner for nonresponse. I recently posted to a group, but when the message didn’t appear for a day I e-mailed the group owner, thinking that I might be on moderations. I tried e-mailing them a few times with no response.

3. Dick Crane said,

   October 21, 2008 @ 4:12 pm

   I an currently involved in two groups that the owner a very good friend of mine had died a month or so ago. She was the sole owner in both groups so no-one was able to assume ownership. We are currently in the process of closing out the two groups and attempting to get the members to join the replacement groups and of course as expected some members are averse to make the move.

4. Kim said,

   October 21, 2008 @ 4:13 pm

   I am a moderator for a group from which the owner went AWOL suddenly about 2 years ago. Emails go unanswered – zero contact since the day she “went missing”. I am unauthorised to approve new members and the group was almost inactive so I made the decision to start a new group – same members, same purpose. Is it possible to have the original group transferred to me? There really is no purpose in keeping the original group open. It is totally inactive now as most people have moved over to the replacement group.

5. Dan Butterfield said,

   October 21, 2008 @ 4:15 pm

   I think the time frame should be 30 days.

   I think if there is no moderator or owner, it should be given to someone who already runs groups, and does a good job. DexterCattle2 discussion list is a Joke, the owner of the list has been gone for 4 years. It is spam filled and a joke. If you go by who posts alot, sometimes that is a bully and not the best person to take over an abandoned list. It should really be someone who runs other lists – ie more than one or two, and does it successfully.

   If the original list owner shows up later, they should be able to run the list with the help of the upgraded person.

   My only concern is having a bully take over a list, that is why it should be someone who has alot of lists.

   Dan

6. catherine said,

   October 21, 2008 @ 4:16 pm

   A reasonable time frame, I would think, would be about six months of the owner not responding to any emails from the group and/or bouncing messages. That’s more than a long vacation. That’s usually enough time for them to check in with their group, and to appoint someone. Though I do agree with the comment above that the group should have a way of picking a new owner/moderator if something does happen. I know a few of the lists I’m on, the head person’s email account got eaten or their yahoo ID did, thus making them unable to do any ownership or moderator tasks for their lists, or even appoint a new moderator to handle things. I do believe that should be left up to the list, not the admins at Yahoo.

7. Jessi said,

   October 21, 2008 @ 4:17 pm

   I have one group that I have tried to get yahoo help with because the owner died over 5 years ago and the group is still active but taken over by spam now. It used to be a great list but the porn sites took it over.

   This would be so nice to finally have something in place to get help for some of these groups, if it is done in the right way.

   Hopefully soon, we will hear something on this, besides a form letter telling me to take it up with the group owner. That always cracked me up. How can you take it up with the owner, if the owner is no longer on this earth????

   Jessi

8. Ron said,

   October 21, 2008 @ 4:17 pm

   1. Time frame: 4 months. 2 inactive months to notification, then 2 months without response before promoting a co-owner
   2. Promote a moderator from within. Do not force a group to have a co-owner. Some groups may not work properly with a co-owner, such as for a family mailing list.
   3. ??
   4. If the original group owner comes back within 1 months of promoting a co-owner, allow the original owner to become a co-owner, if not already done. Otherwise, you snooze, you lose.
   5. You mention the option of naming a “predecessor”, but that’s not the right word. A predecessor is one who comes before, so the owner’s predecessor would be the person who was owner before the current owner. (I don’t remember the proper term off the top of my head.)

9. msm said,

   October 21, 2008 @ 4:19 pm

   Since life happens and groups come second I would say a year is a fair amount of time for an owner to reappear. I would also think that once their email has been bouncing for 6 months it would imply they were no longer interested or able to run their group.

   As for who gets to take over the reins. In a group that managed to stay active, I would say an election of sorts of 2 members or moderators to take over.
   For an inactive group who ever shows interest.

10. Cheri Alexander said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:19 pm

    I am currently a member of 3 groups for which the owners and moderators no longer are present. I am also moderator or owner of several others. The abandoned groups get spam regularly from individual trying to hijack the family-friendly groups into something that is less than G-rated. Often I forward the offending notes to abuse, but this will become more irritating as time goes on.

    Is there no way to give ownership to an abandoned group?
    I think I might be the only active poster in those 3 groups and have attempted to move them to one of the ones I moderate, people are stubborn and don’t generally like change.

11. Gary said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:19 pm

    If the attempt is made to contact an owner and they are truly non-responsive or absent, I might suggest that Yahoo actually post onto the group mesage board the fact that:
    a. there appears to be an absentee owner
    b. that yahoo has attempted to contact the owner with no response
    c. that it is yahoo’s intent in order to protect the integrity of the that particular group to solicit someone from within that group to step up and take the role of owner.

    allow a specific period of time for someone to step up.
    IF no one within the group steps up, send out a second email specific to that group that states:
    this group has no owner and will be
    if no on withing the group steps up to accept that role within [pick an amount of time].

    Then just disband the group and let someone re-establish it if they want.

12. cindy said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:20 pm

    I think a month may be to short. What happens if someone gets sick and is in the hospital? They would come back and find their group taken over by someone else. I am thinking it needs to be at least 6 months of not contact. It is a long time, but you need to consider someone in an unpredictable situation they have no control of.
    cindy

13. LadyShelley said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:20 pm

    I have to say I moderate a rather large group whose owner died several years ago (2003 to be exact). I’m the acknowledged owner of the group by the list membership, however there are things I cannot do simply because I am not the “group owner”. I would hope situations like this are far more the norm than ones where someone wishes to “take over” and I agree there should be a way to expedite a shift in ownership.

14. Don Isenberg said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:20 pm

    Some good questions there, but where you pick a group member by seniorty and activity to replace a owner, what do you do if that person has done nothing but post spam porn sites? Many site I have seen do appear to be abandoned by the owner and most of the users have also abandoned the group due to it becoming a spam farm.

    I think each group that appears to have been abandoned needs to be evaluated on it’s own merits. Has it become a spam farm? then just close it I’m sure somewhere in your TOS you have the right to do so. If it is a active site let the membership decide who should become the owner,

    As for the owner coming back, I’m sure something can be put in the TOS about group abandoment giving Yahoo the right to give ownership to soneone else.

    Just my couple of cents, I’m glad you guys are atleast working on something here.
    Don

15. Gary said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:21 pm

    oh yeah, time frames.
    first notcie to the group 30 days
    second notice to the group 30 days
    disbanded 30 days after that.

16. Linda B said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:21 pm

    I think it is a FANTASTIC idea to give groups a way to keep going and growing after their owner has abandoned them and there is no other way for anyone else to moderate and care for the group.

    I would not want to have to set up a predecessor when I create a group, because when it is brand new, I may not yet know anyone to do it. I would like to have the option to set up a predecessor later.

    I think ownership should not be transferred by Yahoo unless the group owner does not respond to at least two emails, over the course of a month, from Yahoo groups staff regarding the management of the group. I also think that Groups staff should make an effort to communicate with any moderators in the group, or if there are no moderators, a long-standing member who is still active, to find out if the owner is indeed absentee and unreachable before promoting another moderator or member to co-owner.

17. Pat said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:21 pm

    What if the most active person is someone that is abusive of the website? I know of some abandoned groups where someone uses those places to let out abusive, slanderous steam, just because he can with no one watching the group. I think more consideration needs to be taken into account. What is the subject matter of the group and the person being considered to be named new owner been abusive using the group?

18. Laura said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:22 pm

    I already have an co-owner to the group I run and I make it a point to not try to bite off more than I can chew. My group is pretty active. I don’t create group after group after group like some people I know of do. Nor will I join any other groups I feel might take away from what I already have. The FALCON CREST FOREVER group is a joke, there’s no moderation in it and it’s a spammers haven.

19. Jerry said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:23 pm

    Hi Jami! I can see that this would be a problem for you guys. However, please don’t be too hasty. I have more than one group and we are pretty busy with posts. However, I just went through two months of terrible downtime with my server. Thanks for the great job you guys do.. God Bless.. Jerry..

20. Vincent Wright said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:23 pm

    I, for one, would be happy to see Yahoo take a clear stand on handling this.

    In my own case in dealing with abandoned groups, I watched a group which I created for a nonprofit – which unfortunately went out of business – deteriorate into a virtual spam house after I turned it over to the inexperienced moderators at that nonprofit.

    I reached out to Yahoo on more than one occasion offering to help recover and revive the group. Unfortunately, though this is the only area I can think of where Yahoo never responded to me, the group still languishes in a state of uselessness when it could probably still be used to help people in Central Connecticut find jobs. (I created the group 5 years ago and turned it over to the nonprofit about 4 years ago…)

    Keep STRONG, Everybody!
    Vincent

21. Betty Cannon said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:23 pm

    I think that if an owner is absent long enough where he/she is bouncing posts for 6 months or more, their previliages of owner should be tranferred to someone in the group. As for what should be done in the ownerless group with no moderator then Yahoo should post a message to all members for a volenteer who will be voted upon by the current membership

22. Elizabeth said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:23 pm

    Yes, I think you should try and contact each moderator, in the order that they were elevated as moderator (oldest first), and offer them the ownership. If the original owner is simply unresponsive you should give them 30 days to claim ownership or assign a new owner. If the email address is bouncing then you should assign it to the moderator(s) right away- no 30 day wait.

23. Cyn said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:23 pm

    One major problem is when Yahoo for whatever reason kills an Owner’s ID/Email … but not the group itself, thus leaving it without a leader. I have been a member of several groups where this very thing has happened.

    I would hate to see all of those groups disappear as that would get rid of a lot of valuable information. Many of them exist as archives for their various subject matter, but there must be some way to let someone else run the group in order to get rid of spammers…

    I do try to stress to new owners of groups to find moderators they trust, but barring that, there must be some way to transfer control and not let all the spammers take over groups.

24. Mike Williams said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:23 pm

    While some groups have been abandoned and forgotten by their owners, most owners have simply lost their email accounts and got locked out of their own groups. I am also a member of a couple of groups that the owner died. Please give us a way take back control of our groups.

25. Shea said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:23 pm

    I think there should be a posted message system that has to be replied to by all owners within so many days and after two attempts maybe ban the owner after giving new ownership to the next person whom has been involved in the group the longest.

26. Cathy said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:24 pm

    I am a moderator for a group where the owner has disappeared. For three months, I have tried emailing her and inviting her to contact me via Yahoo Messenger and all efforts to contact her have failed. I welcome a process where someone that cares for the group can take over as owner so the group won’t be deleted on the whim of someone that is no longer active in the group. Please let us know when this process is finalized so that I can apply to become owner or co-owner of this great group.

    I think 3 months of inactivity is more than enough time to decide that an owner has abandoned their group.

    I think Yahoo should contact the moderators of the group and offer one of them the opportunity to become the owner. If none of the moderators wants to own the group, then you can poll the members of the group to see if one of them wants to own the group.

    If the group owner suddenly reappears and has a valid reason why they were not active, they can remain co-owner. Otherwise, if they had so little interest in the group that they didn’t interact with the group, they should remain just a member with no special privileges.

27. cajunlou2u said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:25 pm

    One thing that concerns me is when a co-owner abandons, the other owner(s) do not want anyone else choosing a replacement. In one of my groups the co-owner passed away and out of memory and respect for him, he is still listed as co-owner on no mail status. We do not want his name removed, although I have chosen 2 other co-owners to replace his activities. Remaining owners should retain control of their groups, not Yahoo.

    Owners should be encouraged to appoint a co-owner to take over the group if he or she cannot continue. It is called insurance for the group and common courtesy. Yahoo should not be allowed to intervene unless there are no other active co-owners.

28. Tim said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:26 pm

    A straightforward solution, although not perfect, is to first require than any group that is formed require more than one owner or the system would not allow more than say 5 members. Second, have the policy in place that should none of the full owners login in a period of say 30 days then any moderators would automatically be promoted to the status that lets them do everything but delete the group. After additional time say 90 days, Yahoo could change the entire group to “read only” status and not allow new members if there was no one to be “promoted”. This would gently force the creation of a new group if it were popular.

    Large existing groups with one owner could be given a time frame in which a co-owner would be named.

29. Thomas said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:27 pm

    I am an owner and co-owner of a number of groups, but also a member of at least one “abandoned” group where we would LOVE to have a real owner.
    I suggest, however, that as part of your system you post your intention to the group, in addition to emailing group owners. Many users will be happy something is being done.
    In some states you can take title to a car simply by having the DMV contact the last registered owner at his last addy by registered mail. If the mail bounces or the owner receives the mail but doesn’t respond in 30 days the state will issue a new title to you. The system you’re setting up seems about the same. It’s a good one. Responsible owners will not have to fear this.

30. Wallflower said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:28 pm

    Although this is as tricky as the other considerations, there ought to be both notification and participation by the members of a Group, especially when there are no other owners or moderators in a clear line of succession.

    Ideally Yahoo! Groups should send out at least two notices to members of the Group informing them of the situation and asking for suggestions. (Of course, just the notice itself might have the effect of resuscitating a dormant moderator or owner to pick a successor.)

    Again ideally (if a moderator doesn’t reappear), a fairly clear consensus might cluster around 2-6 long-time members in whom the others have confidence. If there’s another consensus without heavy objection that all those members should be moderators, then that part is simple.

    If there’s disagreement after further discussion, then maybe a poll could be conducted (probably with secret votes to avoid future friction, though of course limited to real existing members at the time the vacancy was first announced).

    An owner or owners could be picked either in the same way or by choice of the new moderators.

    My suggestion above is imperfect, of course, especially in a group that has a sharp divide or divisions over ideology or personality (for example has one faction packed the membership list with inactive sympathizers?), but I prefer it to saddling Yahoo! Groups with the unwelcome (and perhaps unpopular) task of picking a group’s owner or moderator.

    Do you guys really want to find yourselves accused of picking someone who’s not (dependent on the Group’s mission) sufficiently scientific or artistic or musical or patriotic or Christian or feminist or socialist or Confederate to be running a particular Group of enthusiasts?

31. Clive said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:28 pm

    There are times when everything is a bit quiet, especially with some members. A while ago the owner of the group I run now, died, it was a sudden thing, I was talking to him one day and the next I was talking to his grandaughter who was telling me he had a heart attack the previous day. I was the groups moderator, so I was keeping the group going. But luckily for me, his wife knew me as well and she also wanted to keep the group going, so she transferred the ownership of the group over to me. I now have 2 moderators for the group and they can keep an eye on the site especially if I went on holiday (vacation). But what if I didn’t know his wife well, what if she just left the site as it is. Yes a moderator has certain controls of the site, but all that the owner has. Something should be set up so that if say I happen to suddenly die and I couldn’t transfer the site over to one of my moderators, Yahoo could first contact my family or one of my moderators who lives near me and find out what has happened and then pass it on to the moderator.
    There are a lot of groups out there and I am a member of a few good ones and I would hate to find I couldn’t access the site because the owner abandoned the group. If the group has moderators then if they want the site to continue it should be passed on to a moderator, if the owner abandons the site.

32. Janet said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:29 pm

    I think the original owner should be able to nominate a successor owner, at the time of creation of the group, or at any time thereafter, to take over if something were to happen to the original owner. I am the owner of a group and would hate to see what would happen if I were to be in an accident, or pass away. Moderators should be the first choice, if another party were to have to determine a new owner. I have 2 moderators in addition to myself, and have given them all the power that I can, except the deletion of the group. I think the 4 months that Ron mentions above would be plenty of time for a legitimate owner to overcome any problems that would keep them away from their group. MHP

33. Jim Bailey said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:30 pm

    Great to see this being discussed and hopefully fix

    30 days would be enough in my appinion

    Onward – Jim

34. GasHed said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:30 pm

    In response to your questions:

    * What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?

    It might be nice if this was related to the activity level of the group. In addition to a time frame, maybe use number of messages to help with this determination.

    I have some groups where there is little activity and I don’t want to get notices for them all the time. Can you base it off of whether owners answer ownership-type notifications like member or message approval? And then have a mechanism for members to suggest replacement which would then trigger a ‘reminder’ email to the owner that can be responded to.

    Also, owners should be able to designate ‘vacation’ for a period of maybe up to a month where they are not at risk of being replaced.

    * Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?

    I like the suggestion that Yahoo! promote a moderator if the current owner doesn’t specify anyone.

    * What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?

    Your listed criteria look good. Moderators first, then members based on activity level.

    * What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?

    I think they should be given ownership back. Or at the very least co-ownership or moderator status.

    * What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.

    This looks like a great plan! And good work on asking the community for advice!

35. Candace Van Auken said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:31 pm

    This is a very important issue for a couple of the groups I run because they are support groups for people who are disabled by chronic illness. Some of the members of these groups feel that they are extremely important in terms of feeling less isolated and alone while going through a long-term devastating illness. These groups are their only real communities. The problem: I’m sick, too, and while I’m not planning to abandon a group, it is possible that I could become too sick to continue or even die. Then what happens to these groups? While we are looking for ways to address this, it is probably an issue for a fair proportion of the health-related groups, and a policy should be developed to address it.

36. Petros Evdokas said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:32 pm

    Hi,

    First, a small correction: you probably meant to write “successor” above, where you wrote “predecessor”.

    Anyway, the problem of Abandoned Groups is real and it’s serious for many groups, having an impact on many social and personal relationships and also on the ability of groups to fulfil their mission.

    Your proposals are good. The suggestions need to be seen both from the preventative point of view (preventing the problem from arising in the future), and also from the corrective point of view, (correcting an existing problem now, in the present).

    Preventative:

    - the idea to ask new group founders to name a successor is a good one. It might make sense to ask them to name one from among the moderators.

    Corrective:

    - it’s a good idea to “promote” some moderators to owner status in groups that are now Abandoned. This should probably begin with groups that have been Abandoned for the longest time, for example for more than one year (I know that such groups exist).

    Before doing that, owner/founders should be notified and be given a few weeks or a month to respond. If they respond and begin to be active again, the succession process can be postponed (if a lapse in owner activity resumes again, the succession process can be restarted).

    - In the absense of moderators, choosing among the most senior or most active members to be promoted to owner might be right in small groups. In larger groups it might prove problematic, since often there are members who are very active but might be disruptive by being so active (eg. might be mailing a lot of unrelated posts, or spam). Any members who are more “worthy” might be among the more silent, non-participating members who are quietly waiting for the owner to come back and fix things.

    In a case like that (large Abandoned groups without a moderator) it might be best to send a notice to all members explaining the situation and asking for feedback. Some of the quieter members might respond and yahoogroups can act accordingly.

    In either case if an Absentee owner returs after many months or years, their status can be restored to moderator temporarily (without power to delete the group or remove members), until the new owner and the returning Absentee owner can work out some better arrangement.

    I’d be happy to help consult with anyone who needs help on making these decisions, or evaluating the situation in an Abandoned group.

    Thanks,
    http://petros-evdokas.cyprus-org.net/Another-sort-of-Introduction.html

37. Renee said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:32 pm

    I like the idea of the owner naming someone to “inherit” and moderate the group if something happens to her. In fact, I have been concerned about this with my group because I don’t want it to disappear if I drop dead. In my group consisting of abuse victims, some of who are being/have been stalked by their abusers, and some of whom are struggling with PTSD, depression, and other issues, moderation is needed to protect privacy, to avoid triggers, and for several other reasons. We are also a Christian group and I edit out the occassional offensive language. I know my members very well and do have a couple whom I think understand the sensitive issues and would do a good job and I would love the option of naming the person/people I think are best. I also think there should be at least 4 months of no contact and no answering emails before an owner is replaced, and they should have the option of returning. Sometimes there are unforseen circumstances- serious illnesses or accidents, house fires, floods, hurricanes, etc. and a person might be hospitalized or even homeless with no computer and no way of getting online. I think we have to givge people who might have extreme issues to deal with extended time to get back on their feet.

38. Andy Momont said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:32 pm

    I’m currently moderator of two groups whose owner has abandoned us. There are things I’d like to be able to do, but can’t because our absentee owner didn’t authorize me. I think either 3 or 6 months AWOL is a reasonable time limit. The best guideline for a new owner would be which if any moderators have been doing the work – inviting members, approving memberships and postings. I think the idea of allowing owners to appoint successors is great, but won’t always happen.

39. Cheri Alexander said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:32 pm

    Gary, That’s a good idea. I have offered to Yahoo be moderator/owner of the 3 groups in question I mentioned above several times.

40. Mary Antonelli said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:32 pm

    I think Yahoo should give the owner 30 days to respond and go 30 more days without a response before they elevate a new owner.

    The new owner should be elevated from the moderators, if any are active, and/or the membership, if there are no other moderators.

    Gary’s suggestion above regarding asking someone to step up and then disbanding the group is a natural followup to the preceding 60 days outlined in my post.

    The reason I’m advocating 60 days, at most, is because of the following:

    (1) Most *responsible* group owners will tell members when they are going on a vacation or will be away from the Internet due to a move, surgery or illness. They can appoint a co-owner in advance of any of the se planned events.

    (2) At 60 days of inactivity from an owner or moderator, a group is basically lost and wandering. This will help groups maintain focus.

    (3) Spam filled groups can be more easily deleted by Yahoo prior to a transfer if an owner is deceased. Forcing a deletion in that event will force everyone to move to the new, active group.

41. Glenn said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:32 pm

    Ron;
    I think you’re looking for “successor” as a replacement for “predecessor”

42. Tim said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:33 pm

    1. I think 90 days is a sufficient time frame for an owner to be absent and/or have hard bouncing e-mails. Thirty days seems a bit abrupt (I know I’ve had personal situations that demanded my attention for 3-4 weeks) and any longer seems excessive.

    2. Moderators are already handling the bulk of the Group’s responsibilities by the time the owner has abdicated, so it is logical that they should have the opportunity to become the new Group owner.

    3. If there are no moderators, volunteers could be solicited from the membership, but I suspect this would cause more problems than it would solve. I think length of membership (first) and number of postings (messages, photos, etc.) should help determine the new owner candidates.

    4. If the original owner “reappears” they can solicit the new owner to be made co-owner or they can create a Group of their own. In my humble opinion, if they abandoned the Group, they sacrificed their ability to return with “no harm, no foul.”

    Thanks for asking for our input!

43. David E. Frazee said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:35 pm

    I am a co-moderator of a long time standing group. I have never heard any correspondence from the other co-moderator. The group owner enters the scene periodically 2 or 3 times a year and acknowledges that she is sorry for her inactivity but has reasons for the inactivity.

    I have moderated the group for years and I am always on the computer. I have always taken the necessary action to handle any issues that come up as in when people want to join and it is very timely, always the same day, if not with in minutes/hours.

    Our groups problem is not the owner or moderator(s) but the memebers that themselves do not engage. We have tried many ways and times to generate active responses but apathy results. So, all of the fault of non-participation can not always be attributed to the owner! We are doing our job!

    I think that you would be better advised to tackle individual group problems than create a blanket proposal.

    I do think however that the group owner needs to do some succession planning in case of an untimely absense.

44. Donna said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:35 pm

    I belong to a group which did not have an owner. There was some competition between two of the members as to which one would be a better moderator. Since all functions of the group were accessible by members a poll was set up. The only thing that the members couldn’t stop was the SPAM. I do not know what Yahoo did, but it assigned full moderator privileges to one of the members. The other member left the group. I think to maintain group dynamics, that Yahoo doesn’t really need to do anything until a group member contacts them saying that the owner/moderator has not replied to email requests for SPAM removal. As a group owner of a specialized group on herps and a group moderator of a support group for the over 50 age group, the amount of activity will vary from group to group. I don’t think there can really be a time limit put on the owner of the group.

    I will say that it should be easier for members of an apparently abandoned group to select a new owner/moderator.

45. Kathi said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:35 pm

    There is a flip side to this situation also, and needs to be considered.

    I run several groups with a few thousand members but do little of the work because I have moderators that have powers to do just about everything except delete the group. I would suggest that in ONLY the cases that a moderator(s) is NOT able to carry on the needed functions for the group, then and only then, the group is up for co-ownership.

    As a group owner I’d HATE to see some time-driven bot email me once a month just because I haven’t used a control of some sort. But it doesn’t mean that I’m not moderatering on some level. Again, in the case of, if moderators are in place and they have the all the power they need to keep the group(s) running – then I don’t see what the problem would be and therefore no reason for change of ownership in these cases…..Kathi

46. ChrisUK said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:36 pm

    I agree with Laura B when she says a fantastic idea, it will keep yahoo groups fresh, and more importantly current (dont you just hate it when you join a group and then it fades into oblivion????) At least this way the current people have nothing to fear, yet the spammers do….

    Send a reminder after no activity for 6 months (or sooner if addy is hard bouncing / mail addy deleted ect)

    then for the 3 months after the 6mth deadline send another reminder every 30 days with a countdown, ala You have 90 days from the date of this notice to create a co-owner blah blah blah then after 30 days You have 60 days etc etc.

    If after the 3 months, a owner has not responded in that time then a member (or former mod) should be promoted, and the original mod removed (back to moderator / co owner status). If there is no moderator available then i would have thought that a chief moderation team should be set up – these are members of yahoo’s community – preferable mods in the same sort of subject matter, who can then take charge, and if necessary promote one of the members to mod status or owner – then leave, and then the 6mth deadline begins again.

47. Sandra Dodd said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:37 pm

    -=-Alternatively, we are also considering giving group owners the ability to name someone as their predecessor should their activity/moderation be inactive for the specified time frame (similar to a living trust).-=-

    Successor (not predecessor).

    I like many of the ideas above. It inspires me to let some of my moderators know my passwords on certain lists so if I die or go catatonic they can transfer the ownership!

48. Jango said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:37 pm

    * What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?
    ==> 3 months from last day when a owner’s action was required to the group.

    * Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?
    ==> There could be an option for the owner to name successor(s) at the time of creating the group or at any time later.
    ==> In the absence of named successor by the original owner, Ask the members of the group to name a new owner. If more members are named, set up a little poll for the group members to vote and choose the one that wins.

    * What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?
    ==> Pls see above.

    * What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?
    ==> Charge a Late fee, report it to credit bureau?? Kidding.
    ==> Let the current owner of the group determine if the reappeared owner can be made the owner or not. Do not refuse a membership though.

    * What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.
    ==> Yahoo should inform all the group members when 1) the owner’s email id goes inactive. 2) if there is a owner activity is pending for over a month.

    GOOD THOUGHT working on the successors if the owner disappears. I’m surprised why it was not thought so long

49. David Halfpenny said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:38 pm

    A very welcome move. Thanks.

    It would be good if Yahoo could respond to requests for help from the Members. Maybe by investigating the group from the outside. Maybe by putting in a Yahoo agent as a Caretaker Moderator. It doesn’t take long for an experienced Moderator to clear out the obvious issues.

    (At the moment, all Yahoo can say when Members ask for help is that their hands are tied by their Privacy Policy.)

    Responding to Member requests has the advantages of:
    - automatically prioritising such groups
    - automatically revealing the people who are most likely to take on Ownership.

    Responding to Members needs care, since either a bully could try to take over, or the spammers could outvote the true members. But that’s going to be true whatever intervention Yahoo plans.

    David

50. Phay said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:38 pm

    I do not think you have have a set time that is the same in every case. For example, an owner with a bouncing email address might have passed away. We had that happen with a group I belonged to and we just started a new one. All the members moved (who were active) and left the old one, including myself. I now wish I could get back into it now to save the group’s history. It was poor planning to have us all quit when there would be no way to go back for anything forgotten.

    If the owner is completely AWOL the time should be much less.
    I suggest that if email is bouncing one month is enough.
    If they have an email that is still receiving, three.

    I can see Cindy’s point about hospitals and how unpredictable life can be but just because you are adding an owner does not mean the original owner is removed. Perhaps make it so the new owner can not remove the old one, or any of their contributions, or delete the group, just in case. Other than that, I can not think of anything that a new owner might do that the old one couldn’t fix later…

    ~Phay

51. Pamela said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:39 pm

    Absenteeism needs to be measured by pending messages, photos, files or memberships that are not getting attention, not just a lack of activity for the group in general.

    An owner should be able to leave 2 people, in succession, to take over a group. Moderator A, and then if Moderator A is gone or refuses the responsibility, Moderator B. If however, no one has been named at the outset or with prompting, (it may be tough to set this up for a new group, moderators usually evolve), Yahoo should promote a moderator from the group. I’d go with length of time as a moderator over more recent activity in the case of multiples.

    The other two questions are harder, and something I will have to think about.

    One comment: an owner should not be considered absent if other activity is happening on the board but new members are not being approved. Because it’s not easy to send a message to someone who has requested membership but may or may not be a spammer, I often let pending members just sit there… if months go by and no one on the message board where people in this group of mine first come together complains that they are being ignored, then I deny them, but I’m cautious in letting in and do let things sit. As long as other activity is still happening on the board unfettered by an owner not approving, owner is logging in, etc. to groups, then he/she should not be considered absentee.

52. Susan Farmer said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:40 pm

    I’m going to address each of your bullet points in sequence. I belong to several abandoned groups that I’d happily take over if Yahoo would only let me!

    * What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?

    IMO, no more than 30 days. I’ve spent *YEARS* trying to contact the owners. The group is just spam fodder right now, and there’s nothing that I can do about it. I’m a moderator, but I can’t change the permissions to make new members moderated. Right now, they can join and spam the world — and all I can do is clean up after it.

    ===================================

    * Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?

    Most owners when they start a group don’t have any plans to go AWOL — but folks do die unexpectedly. In addition, the moderator may not have anybody in mind upon startup. I really don’t think that should be a requirement for starting a group, but it does have it’s attractiveness.

    I think that yahoo should ask for Volunteers on the group to see if anybody is willing to take on the responsibility. Yahoo could then vet that individual based on their group habits. Do they already own/moderate other groups? Do they have a clue what that responsibility would entail?

    =========================================
    * What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?

    see above answer. I think that you should take volunteers and then see what their “yahoo resume” looks like.

    =========================================

    * What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?

    tough noogies. In the case of the above group, I’ve been trying to reach the moderator for several *YEARS* Should they turn up now, how do you know it’s them? If it is, why didn’t they respond before? Due Diligance ™ was exercised in trying to reach them. If they don’t respond within the allotted time, that’s their problem. Of all the groups that I’d happily take over, I’ve been trying to contact the owner for multiple years IN ALL CASES.

    =========================================

    * What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.

    Off the top of my head, I’m not certain that I can think of things associated with this particular issue. Other issues, certainly (I’d like the ability to ban somebody at the same time that I deny their moderated message, for instance) — but that had nothing to do with Abandoned Groups.

    If I think of anything else, I’ll be certain to let you know!

53. Conrad said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:40 pm

    What should the specified time frame be? It should depend on list activity. 30 days is enough for a list that gets multiple postings every day; six months may not be enough for a group with only occasional postings.

    Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone? Owners should be encouraged but not required to name a potential successor.

    What other criteria should we use? You suggested “some combination of seniority and participation.” That sounds pretty good, but it should probably be weighted towards seniority, to prevent serial spammers from getting control of a group.

    What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later? More to the point, how do you (Yahoo) know it’s really the original owner and not somebody who found his or her password? After “x” amount of time (again depending on list activity), the original owner should lose all rights, other than the right to subscribe like anyone else and to communicate with the new list owner.

54. Wade Smart said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:41 pm

    I would ask the same questions as above: how long is an extended amount of time to be uncontactable by the group? Then on top of that, how long do you give the owner to contact Yahoo that they are still in fact with the group?

    What if a group owner does re-appear? If they have been absent for a long period of time and the group has suffered and there was no one available to control the group – then they were a dis-service to the group. If they are removed as owner so that the group may benefit and at some later date they return and demand ownership of the group returned – the group is now in the hands of some one willing to run it and be there – they were not – therefore ownership needs not to be returned.

    I think YahooGroups is making some head way on this problem and there are no easy answer but, as you have laid out some simple steps 1) contact the owner and require a response in 30 days?, 2) if no response assign no-ownership to a willing party for 120 days?, and then 3) after the assigned period the co-owner can acquire full ownership.

    Sounds like a good plan to me.
    Wade

55. Roy McCoy said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:41 pm

    I mainly just want to support your decision to enable continuation of abandoned lists. Jami’s message and this blog entry suggest to me that you could use your own judgment on this, and if you’re considering wide input from group owners so much the better. But to respond quickly to your specific questions, since you asked:

    > What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent
    > before someone else within the group be promoted?

    I saw six months mentioned. That seems to me perhaps a little on the long side, but not bad. I think that’s what I’d go for.

    > Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group
    > or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over
    > in the event they go inactive when they start the group?

    I don’t think the current owner should have such exclusive power, or that it should necessarily be an existing moderator who is promoted. There may not be one, for one thing. So I’d say let that depend on the individual case if possible.

    > What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group
    > owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?

    Whatever seems appropriate in the given case.

    > What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months,
    > or even years later?

    I’d say you should make an exceptionless rule here, but I don’t have a specific suggestion as to what it should be.

    > What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t
    > addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.

    Just do it. One way or another. Thanks.

56. Ken said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:42 pm

    I agree that it is a problem that should be solved. Some groups are dead because messages require approval of a missing and bouncing owner, other groups are filled with spam and there is no moderation (I know a couple of groups where the owner has been bouncing owner for at least two years).

    If there are co owners or moderators, then they should automatically be promoted to full owner without a selection process. Such a co owner or moderator should be able to directly request that ownership be transferred to him if the owner is bouncing for 60 days.

    I do not think giving ownership to “the most active member” is good, that member could be just a big time spammer!

    Different approaches are needed depending on how the group is set up. If members can still communicate (messages do NOT require approval), one could offer to take over the group and yahoo could automatically set up a “does anyone object?” button. I could envision an automated process where owners bouncing for a prolonged period would cause a “new owner needed, please volunteer” button to appear on the homepage.

    The worse issue is where messages are moderated and members cannot communicate. Perhaps any group where members are moderated and the owner is bouncing for 60 days should automatically become unmoderated so that members could work the approach above.

57. Kim said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:42 pm

    Abandoned groups really are a big problem. I think 2 months is a very long time for someone who runs a group to disappear without a trace, and therefore would be plenty long enough to attempt to email the owner offlist to request his or her input.

    If after another month the owner has not responded or returned to the group, that would be three full months that the owner has been absent. I think that’s plenty of time to take action.

    Signing something (digitally) when you create a group is a good idea. It isn’t always possible to immediately designate a co owner. I’ve started several groups without having anyone join with me who wanted to be an owner. I would suggest making it optional to designate a co owner when starting a group and to require that they agree to allow Yahoo! Groups to act if they don’t.

    If the co-owner doesn’t step in at that point and is also absent, then I’d probably start the 3 month process over again, just to protect yourselves.

    Once it’s determined that there is no owner or co owner to the group I’d suggest a note be sent to any moderators, asking them to take over but giving them a shorter time to respond, probably a week. The group has already been without guidance for 3 to 6 months, afterall.

    If you must take over then I agree with your thoughts on looking for the most active posters and length of time on the group, but ONLY posters who were there long before the owner became absent. I’d hate to see a frequent porn poster be given the group because he took over after an owner went missing.

    If the frequent poster was posting regularly before the owner disappeared, then I think it’s safe to assume he isn’t a bully posting without the owner’s consent.

    It doesn’t take long for a group to be taken over by spammers or to be destroyed by having no one able to approve new members or worse, posts. Friends will quickly lose touch of each other having no means to get in touch off list. That would really be a shame. I’d really appreciate a much quicker takeover than has been previously suggested here.

    Thank you for soliciting our opinions. It’s good to know you care about those who use your services.

58. Edie said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:43 pm

    I agree that some system to replace absent owners needs to be in place. This would also help in the case of owners who create a group of local interest, then move out of the area. I am still an (active) owner of a couple of sites that are strictly local in activity, but I now live over 3000 miles away. I would LOVE to be able to turn these sites over to someone else who lives there.

    As an “older” owner, however, I would like to see a longer time frame than the one month suggested by one person. People can have sudden catastrophic health issues, or even natural disasters can prevent access for weeks at a time. I own several sites that my husband does not belong to. However, I do have several moderators in other parts of the country. Hopefully, they would carry on in my absence, whether planned or not. I would, however, be rather thoroughly PO’d if I came back on line a few weeks later to find that my sites had been handed over to “whomever”. My own hand-picked moderators….OK, I could live with that. Anyone else….no way, unless I’m 6 feet under & beyond caring.

59. peja said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:44 pm

    I’ve got several groups where the ID I was using was lost, leavig the list without a moderator. I would like to know how to get control of those lists ack so I can post to and moderate.

60. Andrew said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:44 pm

    When an owner creates a group they should notminate a few other memebers who could take over. Like a will. That would work for future groups. As for past groups If there is no traffic for 6 months Yahoo could send a survey to the members to either find a new active owner or delete the group.

61. Theresa said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:45 pm

    I’m now a co-mod for a group that was all but abandoned, so I’m glad to see this is being addressed.

    How will Yahoo become aware of a potential abandonment?

    I think if an owner has not responded to official email from Yahoo regarding their group after 30 days, there should be some sort of message sent to the group announcing Yahoo’s intent to reassign ownership. Another 30 days should be given, though there should be additional emails sent during this time.

    An owner might name someone to take over the group when it is set up, but there’s no guarantee that person will still be around if the owner goes absent after a long period of time. That would be a good first defense, but wouldn’t that person already be a moderator on the list? I think I’d prefer a current mod being given the opportunity to take over ownership.

    If there are steps in place to replace an owner; ie enough time for communication, etc. then I don’t think the original owner should be given any consideration if they reappear later without some sort of extraordinary reason for non-response.

62. Anthony Wright said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:45 pm

    I think that 30 days is way too short. 3 months is better, perhaps even longer, depending on the situation.
    I have seen vibrant, interesting groups change overnight into a nightmare of spams and rubbish, so they should be dealt with swiftly.
    It is frustrating to join a group and find the moderator has moved on , and is not managing it properly. It also frustrating when one or two idiots are allowed in, and they start spamming and are not removed immediately.
    Anyway, good to see that you are looking to solve this problem.

63. Nita said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:45 pm

    I would like to see a requirement for co-owners or at the very least, a moderator with enough power to run the group if the owner disappears. We’ve an owner disappear in two groups. No owner and none of the mods have the power to do anything. Her e-mail is discontinued and she hasn’t replied to snail mail. It’s very frustrating.

64. Jim Clunie said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:46 pm

    1. There should be a link for a member (only) to report that the owner has abandoned the group. If such a report has been sent, the link should no longer be available (no further reports and a suitable message should be displayed) for 60 days. The re-activation message should be sent to all co-owners and any owner should be able to respond within 60 days.
    2. If the group has moderators, Yahoo should send an invitation to all moderators and the original owner to apply for owner status. The owner should not be required to name a successor, as this won’t be appropriate for all groups – or most, I would think.
    3. If the group has no moderators, or no moderator responds after 30 days, Yahoo should send an invitation to all members and the original owner to apply for owner status. After 30 days Yahoo should choose a new owner from those who have volunteered, if more than one, based on seniority and number of posts.
    4. After already failing to respond to 3 separate messages in 120 days, if the original owner reappears he should not have any recourse apart from arguing his case to the new owner, except in a case of abuse.

    I don’t agree with those who would like to fast track the process. Unless the applicants can prove death or the owner intending to give up the group (the same special consideration as is available now) the owner must be given a fair chance to respond, to prevent theft of groups.

65. Howard Thomas said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:48 pm

    I would think that an owner might be considered absentee if AWOL for 3 to 6 months. Shorter time doesn’t account for life’s unforseen events (such as an illness, personal disaster, etc.). However, I moderate and/or own more than 20 lists and one in particular has a problem. The owner died more than two years ago. It’s a very active list and although my wife and I are moderators, it would be wonderful if there was a way to change our status to owner.

    I find the attention that Yahoo is giving to this issue refreshing.

66. Mark said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:48 pm

    One of the groups I own I started to replace a group I was in because the owner got cancer and died without naming a replacement. She left the group unmoderated and taken over by spammers and nobody could get Yahoo to do anything, so I created the new group.

    Maybe the owner should name someone who could take over in case s/he can’t fulfill his or her duties, possibly be required to name a co-owner or moderator who would get promoted after three months of the owner going MIA or upon notification.

67. Dan said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:49 pm

    When a replacement owner should be determined, should only come after it is clear that actions required by the owner have not been occurring. Additional, requirements should also be required and not just the owners mail bouncing, over a few days or weeks, as this seems to be a common occurrence. In the case of our Chat group, members are required to cleared by the group owner and we only have requests several times a year. As such, the group operates pretty much unattended. I like the 30-60-90 day suggestion.

    Maybe we as owners should be requested to designate an heir to the group ownership. Although I’m not ready to give up ownership, I would be glad to designate an heir or trustee, who would be assigned at the end of the 90 day period.

68. Paul Jones said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:49 pm

    What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?

    A minimum of three months of total inactivity by the group owner should transpire before any action is taken. No action should be automatic. That is, yahoo shouldn’t monitor groups to decide whether a owner has gone awol. Rather, yahoo should not take action until a member of the group notifies yahoo of a possible awol owner. If no one is complaining, let sleeping dogs lie.

    Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?

    There will always be owners who do not nominate someone to take over in their absence. Yahoo cannot rely upon an owner to nominate. If the owner doesn’t nominate a successor, then Yahoo needs to promote someone.

    What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?

    Regardless of what is done, the decision will be difficult. I would look for someone who has been an active positive contributing member of the group. Seniority should be considered, but seniority should not be of primary importance. I would give preference to someone who is already successfully running some other group.

    What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?

    I believe yahoo should protect the original owner. The new owner(s) should not be able to delete the original owner’s membership nor even demote the original owner to mere moderator or member. Should the original owner come back, then I would leave it to the group of owners to work it out.

    What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here?

    I appreciate that you are taking this into consideration. I have been a member of several groups that were abandoned by their owners. Those groups were eventually taken over by spammers — the owners had not set up any safeguards to keep spammers out — and were trashed. I also appreciate your desire to handle this situation carefully and understand your reluctance to visit this issue.

69. Delia said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:50 pm

    I had joined a group where the owner had seemingly abandoned the group. I wrote several times, stated that I was willing to moderate the group and get rid of the spam that was flooding in, with no response. I announced I was starting my own group if there was no response. I subsequently waited several more weeks and then started my own group. After a couple of months, the owner finally came back on his group, said he was busy elsewhere, and offered me the moderatorship. Too late. His group is still inactive. I still belong and check it occasionally.

    1) Re: owners not able to get into their own groups: advise them to sign in with another (dummy) id at the start of their ownership. Should there ever be tampering with their email, ownership command status, or whatever, they can prove they are the second ID and can take over again per yahoo admin. procedures.

    2) Owners should (annually) be asked to name someone, from their list of members or a friend, (along with their email address) who they would want as a successor should they not be able to front the list anymore, for whatever reason. State that yahoo will take over choosing from among the membership in a certain amount of time should the owner go absentee for any reason if they do not respond with their own choice. Give them a time frame. That way there is at least one first choice for yahoo to appoint as new owner.

    I suggest ‘yearly’ as the owner may have to change their choice, as members come and go, or a friend may not want to do it anymore. Should the successor also be sent a memo yearly asking if they still want the possible future responsibility???

    3) Regarding the time frame, well, if someone has an emergency major surgery, for instance, it usually takes a couple of months to get back to any kind of computer interest. I suggest 90 to 120 days before changing ownership. That way lists can still be cleaned up, and most people will not have quit yet.

    4) Yes, allow the owner to get back their group if within 12, 18, or 24 months. Ask the moderators for a vote as to time they think reasonable.

70. Peter Bright said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:50 pm

    Owners may “abandon” their groups for many legitimate reasons and it is often entirely appropriate that a suitable alternative takes over.

    Evaluating the integrity of a person seemingly suitable presents difficulties because some form of investigation is required. The standard of that investigation cannot be too high – it is simply impracticable.

    The Yahoo group Noise Watch Australia, of which I am a member (of 6) was set up in perfectly good faith by a man trying to help that not-for-profit incorporated society. It has served its purpose with integrity and its continuance is desired by its members.

    Sadly, this fine man fell ill quite some months ago and has not responded to my offers to either take it over or moderate it.

    That leaves the remaining 5 members with a dilemma that remains vexing and unresolved to this day.

71. Larry said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:50 pm

    I think that owners should be encouraged to name a successor (this is the correct word not “predecessor”). But if they have not and they remain absent from and active group and unreachable for 60 days then a new owner should be selected by vote of the remaining active members.

72. Connie said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:50 pm

    Time frame: I disagree with more than 1-2 weeks. If the group is already floundering, and the group owner has been inactive or cannot be reached, the group has already had enough problems and needs a new group owner or co-owner immediately.

    Who will be new owner? I think both; the owner should, at the time of forming a group, name another person to become owner or simply name a co-owner at the time of forming the group; But, I also think the main owner should have the opportunity to be able to change this co-owner as with moderators in case of disagreements between the original/main owner. When a group owner becomes inactive, a new group owner should be picked from moderators of the group after given notice by Yahoo as to seniority and activity and if they will move to the group owner position.

    Other Criteria for naming a new owner: Unfortunately, this would mean someone from Yahoo would need to monitor the group in order to choose the most active or un-biased person to be named owner if Yahoo wants to get that involved. I would think no other criteria would be neccesary if the person wants to do it and is active and un-biased and has been doing the job of group owner for some time already.

    Group owner re-appears: Well, so be it. They reappear. They had left the group to it’s own devises now for some time so they can petition the new group owner to be a moderator but I don’t think they’re reliable enough to be able to just take up ownership again.

73. Deborah Terreson said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:51 pm

    First, there should be a criteria set for what *exactly* constitutes an abandoned group. Bouncing e-mail to the owner is a good start. Group messages filled with spam is another. Setting a time limit on not hearing from a group owner, say, 1 year, gives both Yahoo and whomever would be assuming control of the group time to sort out the particulars concerning group content, messages and member lists. If the person taking over the group appears to want to use it to do little more than allow the posting of spam, this is where Yahoo itself can step in, and put the question to the members.

    I feel this is workable from everyone’s standpoint – also the year buffer of time before a transfer in ownership gives the original owner a chance to step back in if they can or care to. I think to my own groups, 2 of which see very little activity and one of which is in appearance all but abandoned – but is not. It’s just updated *vary* rarely.

    Not every group gets thousands of messages or members coming and going a month. For the ones that do, and see these abandonment problems, getting around to resolving the ownership issue is well past time due.

    Thanks.

    Deb.
    foodandart@yahoo.com

74. Jeannette Byrnes said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:51 pm

    While looking for information about a new diagnosis I found two groups with appropriate names. Unfortunately both groups had been long abandonned by their owner and the site was filled with spam. Yahoo has a method where you can have an election and vote in new moderators. This worked very well for both groups, but the groups are still owned by the absent owner.
    When I first joined the groups I noted that the spam was addressed to a long list of groups that where disease or problem oriented.
    So many who are looking for help just get the spam.
    Just as their is a way to appoint new moderators I think the same should be available to replace absentee owner’s.

75. Marcie Lane said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:52 pm

    What happens whe a hacker gets into a group and is able to delete group owner profile and staus? This has happened to a group I belong to twice and each time a new group had to be createdby the owner that got tossed by the hacker. it owuld seem that yahoo groups are not as secure as they should be.

76. Rae said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:53 pm

    I belong to an abandoned & unmoderated group that has a specific brand name as part of the group name. How would you choose a new owner/moderator when many of the biggest ‘participants’ are merely spammers and porn pushers? I’m very sure that this manufacturer would be unhappy to be associated with much of what is being posted, is in the files and links.
    Could criteria for new ownership at least include those who have a desire to take over? Maybe Yahoo! could post a message of intent to these groups and select from those interested.

77. candy said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:53 pm

    i belong to a number of hibby groups where the oners have gone AWOL.
    the owners have lost interest in the hobby and in turn just left the group with out turning over ownership.

    i think the member of the group who reports the owner as AWOL should get first dibs on claiming the group after yahoo has varified that they are inactive or have invalid e mail account.

    i think the waiting period for the original owner to respond should be 2 months…in case they are traveling or working!!
    i think the take over should be sooner if they have no valid e mail address or have been bouncing for over a year!

    if the owner comes back at a later date, then they are just regular member of the group. the new owner then can then choose to promote them as co owner!

78. Shanon Cimbura said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:53 pm

    What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?

    1 month. That is time if an emergency happened to notify someone within the group.

    Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?

    Promote. Waiting for the current group owner takes too much time. If they are responsible they will have someone in place and yahoo will not have to interveene.

    What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?

    Length of membership time within groups, number of postings to show they are an active member

    What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?

    They should be removed.

    What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here?

    The biggest problem that I have run into is a group owner who cannot be contacted by email (bouncing) and doesn’t have other contact info listed. If they don’t have a valid email address with yahoo, give them 30 days and then delete them. Groups shouldn’t be penalized for one persons irrisponsibility.

79. Carol said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:54 pm

    * What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?
    Two months, a group needs an active owner watching over the group. The group I am interested in has only been getting spam messages since around 2005.

    * Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?

    If the moderator is doing their job then yes they should be promoted. If they are ignoring the group also then it should go to someone in the group.

    * What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?

    1. They have another yahoo group and are running it right.
    2. They care about what the group is for
    3. They ask to be made owner

    * What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?

    Since they did not care about the group in the past, especially if it is a year or more then they should not be given ownership again
    .
    * What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.

    How soon will this go into effect. How do we report a group that the owner is inactive and has been since around 2005?

80. Barbara Crawford said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:54 pm

    I would think 3 months of no contact with a group owner would be sufficient to name a new owner. To be safe, naming 2 new co-owners would be a safe way to prevent a bully or spammer from being given control. Yahoo could post a message to the group announcing the names of the new co-owners with a place members could respond to with any objections. If the original owner returns, they would forfeit their right to the ownership position. However, there are always exceptions to every rule, so it should be noted that Yahoo can & will make changes based on each individual group’s situation (for example, if an owner loses their Yahoo ID/email account, Yahoo can switch over ownership of their group to their new Yahoo ID/email account)..

81. John W. Moore III said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:54 pm

    Earlier in this ‘Comment’ area msm summed it up. My ‘Props/Kudos’ to both Jamie & Gidget for assisting Me with a situation exactly like this. Group Owner suddenly MIA without assigning Full Privileges to any single Moderator. Choices discussed were to ‘abandon’ the Group and re-create it on Google Groups or under another Name on Yahoo.

    Contacting Jamie resulted in the expected ‘runaround’ of Links but did result in the salvaging of PGP-Basics-OT Group by Giget granting/elevating the status of a willing, existing Moderator to Full Privilege status and thereby preserving the Group without painful interruption. Thanks Jamie & Gidget!

    Anyone wishing to Contact Me direct may use My Yahoo ID, jmoore3rd, and presumably You know how.

    JOHN
    Timestamp: Tuesday 21 Oct 2008, 19:54 –400 (Eastern Daylight Time)

82. Alice said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:55 pm

    I am a co-mod for 2 groups, one in which the owner died 4 years ago, and the other in which the owner has been absent due to ill health for 2 years. It is frustrating, especially with the second group, because group settings need to be changed to accommodate HTML, and the sig line is very long and out-of-date. Neither I nor my other active co-moderator can do this. The second group is one of the most active on Yahoogroups, posting approximately 150 messages per week. If Yahoogroups decides to add owners based on activity, they should look at, in groups like mine that are fully moderated, which moderators approve the messages. This is shown in the full message headers as “X-Approved By”. We have 4 other moderators who do not have message approval, or any other moderator privileges, and this was the owner’s decision before he became ill. My co-moderator and I can supply you with details. As for the first group, it has gone inactive. It was suggested in the second group that we start a new group and transfer the members, but we don’t want to do this because we would lose our vast archives, which are used in scholarly research.

83. Kathy B said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:56 pm

    I am the owner of a group that one day Yahoo decided, for whatever reason, that I couldn’t post anymore. I had not co-moderator and can’t get back into my own group. There is spam that posts, even though I thought I had it set up to approve memberships.

    I would LOVE to be able to get my group back. When the problem intially happend, Yahoo couldn’t explain the reason I was bounced from my group, nor could they help me.

    Unfortunately, my e-mail has changed and I can’t remember the name of the group.

    I would encourage Yahoo to find some way to work with group owners who find themselves in my situation.

    kathy B

84. Debbie said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:59 pm

    I think there need to be different guidelines for the different types of groups. For example, if the group is restricted, and email and/or memberships must be reviewed, then having the sole owner/moderator disappear could be devastating.

    For a group that has either memberships or email restricted:
    1. Owner is only moderator – No response to email or email bounces for 30 days, assign someone as co-owner and let them assign more moderators.

    2. Owner has assigned at least one other moderator with limited functions – No response to email or email bounces for 45 days, make moderator co-owner.

    For those groups where the email and memberships are not restricted:
    1. Owner is only moderator – No response to email or email bounces for 60 days, assign someone as co-owner and let them assign more moderators.

    2. Owner has assigned at least one other moderator with limited functions – No response to email or email bounces for more than 60 days, make the moderator a co-owner.

    Now the second part of the problem is figuring out who to make the co-owner. In situations where there is a moderator, elevating the most active moderator to co-owner makes the most sense.

    When there is no moderator, nothing beats having a Yahoo! staff person look through a month’s worth of activity to make a judgement call. However, I’m thinking that with the number of groups sitting out there, doing the hands on may not be what Yahoo! really wants to do. Automating this decision process becomes problematic. Picking the oldest member who is still active (posts, uploads, etc) in the group may be the best way.

    Last, to avoid the hijacking of a group by rogue members, the original owner should have some kind of setting so that the new co-owner can’t kick them out. Of course, the original owner can always leave on their own and determine who the new “supreme” owner will be.

85. Gustavo Eulalio said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 4:59 pm

    Maybe it’s best to leave the decision to the owner himself, via group setup. The options would be available upon the creation of the group.

86. ChrisUK said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 5:00 pm

    Supplemental….. (I had to go and check this)

    Any groups that i have had a hand in setting up (or actually ‘own’ has 2 or more co-owners and a set of moderators….. that way unless 2 people pass over to the other side there is always gonna be a owner around to sort out the group and if so required delete it

    Reading the comments.. i agree with Delia… about owners not able to get into their own groups, and know people who have done this (even husband and wife teams)

    I’m glad to see that yahoo listens to its membership. and hope this is a positive way of going forward.

87. Elizabeth said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 5:00 pm

    After a good friend and active member of my group passed away at an untimely age, I began to worry about what would happen to the groups I own if something happened to me. I love the ideas presented here, and would prefer if the absent owner did not have to name someone just for cases like this (unless the named beneficiaries could be picked ahead of time.) A system where either the most active moderator (or member if no mods are present) is selected based on a formula made from a combination of post count and frequent activity, after say.. 5 or 6 months (to make sure to account for 3+ month summer holidays) sounds good to me. There could also be a poll in which active members can vote for who they think should take over, just in case the person with the most posts/activity is someone of low character who the majority of members dislike.

88. PeTeR said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 5:01 pm

    It is a good idea that the owner names some in the group (with their consent) who can take over if and when he decides to abandon the group. It is the owner and the group members who can decide the order of seniority. We could make this a new policy that all groups comply with (even existing ones). Ninety days of inactivity should be enough time to wait.

89. George Elting said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 5:01 pm

    As a long time group owner, I think a reasonable test for abandonment should always be bent toward the original owner. I think an extended period of neglect should be part of it. I feel that some attempts to contact the owner, if not successful, should also be part of the equasion. If there are group moderators, then they need to be consulted too.

    If a group is flooded with spam and not being taken care of, then a plan needs to be made to nominate someone else to run the list.

    I’ve been a member of at least 2 lists that were left to spammers and it’s not easy to deal with. I just unsubscribe myself and forget about that list.

    I also have health problems, so I occasionally fail to deal with my lists for a short period of time, but it’s not within my control. There are probably other reasons a list owner may not be able to deal with things in a timely manner.

90. Barry Marks said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 5:02 pm

    I’m glad you guys are taking a look at this issue. I’ve been in groups in the past where it’s a real problem.

    I have ownership in two groups. One is my group and I’ve made someone else a co-owner just in case something happens to me. In another group I’m the co-owner just in case something happens to the real owner. So we’re covered. I think one thing you could do right now is to advise group owners to consider doing this.

    I think the time till you notify a seemingly absent owner isn’t important and I’m not sure why you even need such a time. If members contact Yahoo saying that there’s a problem, an email to the registered owner could be sent right away. What’s the point in delaying that? If the owner is gone he won’t respond and that’s where waiting time matters. If the owner is there it might be good information to him if someone is trying to take over the group.

    As for how long to wait after notifying the owner, I would say wait a week and if there’s no answer send a follow up notice just to be sure it didn’t get lost somehow. Maybe even a couple of follow-ups. Then, if you don’t hear from the owner after a month or two or three, send another notice that something is going to be done.

    I agree that the answer is to promote a moderator if there is one. If not, you might set up a poll to let the members pick the new owner.

    Then, if the old owner comes back at a later time, let the new owner decide what to do about it. I was given ownership of my group when the old owner left and, without even telling me, turned it over to me. He had asked for a volunteer and there were no takers so he picked me. When he came back a couple years later I offered to give it back to him but he didn’t want it. I’d have been happy to give it back. He had done a good job with it. I would not have been happy if I’d been forced to give it back. It had begun to feel like my group.

    I think it’s very good that you’re doing something about this. I think it’s less important just what you do about it as long as there’s some system in place to deal with lost owners and everyone knows what that system is and what to expect from it.

    Barry

91. Jerry said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 5:05 pm

    Why make this a complicated issue? If it appears as if a group has been abandoned and attempts to contact the owner are negative, place a series of messages into that group advising everyone that at a give time the group will be terminated giving the current user-ship ample time to move to others or restart the group anew…
    My second suggestion if you don’t wish to be radical would be to place a owner/moderator report button or email message where they must respond periodically or at a give time… If they don’t within a reasonable time, follow the same procedure as above…

92. June said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 5:05 pm

    I think in the case of an inactive owner, they should have to be inactive for one year unless they are bouncing. If their email is bouncing then 6 months should be the time frame, IMO. I think if there are moderators, then they should be contacted to see if they are interested in taking over the ownership role. I don’t think anyone should automatically be ‘promoted’.

    When there is no moderator, perhaps a post could be sent to the group asking that anyone interested in taking over the group respond to a certain link. I don’t think it would be right for yahoo groups employees randomly choose a member to act as list owner. Personally, I never have understood why active members of a list are so reluctant to leave an abandoned group in favor of a new one that would be created with the same people and actually have someone at the helm but, I’ve seen it over and over.

    In addition to addressing ‘missing owners’, I wish yahoo would address the defunct groups that are cluttering up yahoo groups and making searches almost useless because you have to wade through so many groups that haven’t had a post in over a year in order to find one that is active. I’d also like to see an advanced search feature for groups so you could have more criteria than just a particular keyword or two. We should be able to search based on keyword and then have options like search within a certain category, or search groups created within a certain time frame, etc. That would definitely net one more specific results, especially when searching with a keyword that may have more than one meaning.

93. Walt Friedrich said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 5:07 pm

    This smacks of the first step in micromanaging a free-flowing system that generally has been functioning just fine, although undoubtedly with some exceptions, a fact that should have been apparent and foreseen at the outset. I say, “Hands Off!” The Owner created the group, and the Owner has the unique power to continue it or disband it. No quasi-organization has the right to usurp that authority. Maybe it’s just the current political climate in the U.S. that causes you to emulate our own government in meddling into citizens’ self-created private affairs.

94. Deanne said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 5:08 pm

    I believe that if an owner has failed to perform the groups duties (like approve members) for a period of one month – action needs to be started to contact owner at the request of a list moderator or member, An email should be sent to any email address on file for the owner and if not responded to within two weeks, one of the moderators should be given full privileges to manage the list. Should an owner return months later – existing moderators need to all be willing to accept the old owner back or it doesn’t happen.

95. Hailmaster said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 5:10 pm

    It would be nice to not be knocked offyour own list. This happened to me several years ago. In spite of the fact, that I was the only list owner on it. Um, Yahoo at that time, said it could not happen and ignored my request to re-instate me as list owner.

    The moderator, was able to approve me getting back on the list, but obviously not to become the list owner again. So my very first Survivalism list has had no owner since 2001 I think. When I started up another Survivalism list called Survivalis_II. BTW, the moderator is still on the job, but he hasn’t okayed any new members in quite a while. I would love to get the ownership of that list back.

96. Hailmaster said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 5:11 pm

    It would be nice to not be knocked off your own list. This happened to me several years ago. In spite of the fact, that I was the only list owner on it. Um, Yahoo at that time, said it could not happen and ignored my request to re-instate me as list owner.

    The moderator, was able to approve me getting back on the list, but obviously not to become the list owner again. So my very first Survivalism list has had no owner since 2001 I think. When I started up another Survivalism list called Survivalism_II. BTW, the moderator is still on the job, but he hasn’t okayed any new members in quite a while. I would love to get the ownership of that list back.

97. Reggie said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 5:12 pm

    * What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?

    depends on group settings.
    6 months maximum
    configurable to less than that, if the owner decides to do so.

    * Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?

    Both. Make it a configurable feature, but that it defaults to promoting someone if unspecified.

    * What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?

    your “failover” criteria above is good…
    - first to existing moderators
    - then to most active/most senior

    * What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?

    - nothing. (i.e. hey, how you been? nope, this isn’t your group… Sam was promoted… he’s been doing a great job.)

    * What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.

    - the only other concern is if the group is “very dead”, what are the “termination” policies to govern deletion of the data. You may want to consider some sort of archival option for the group owner (e.g. here, download this zip file which is your group… you ever want to reinstate it, upload it and we’ll recreate the group from that.) Tricky to implement, given a moving database structure, but with a metafile which describes the schema version, it shouldn’t be too bad. You’d probably also want some kind of hash in the metafile to keep people from uploading complete garbage (or maliciously modified data).

    (e.g. I have some groups that probably I won’t go back to, but I’d hate to lose all of the info in them, and there’s a remote chance that I might need them again some day in the distant future.)

98. Cheriel Jensen said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 5:13 pm

    I would hate to see valuable archives disappear. There are some groups where not much is said in the present but with archives which function as a valuable resource. These groups, if they are “moderated” so spam cannot be posted, could just continue as open archives when the owner or moderator is on vacation. I am sometimes not near a computer for several weeks at a time. Nevertheless, my group’s archives are still accessible and continue to serve the group.

    I would think Yahoo could establish and place inactive groups in a unique category to prevent the spam, but in a waiting, accessible mode till the moderator catches up.

    All owners/moderators should be trained to trim out the spam so the archives are limited in size.

    Owners should also be allowed to trim the unnecessary repeats of former messages out of the subject messages when archived to reduce the archive size and make them easier to search.

99. Autumn Sandeen said,

    October 21, 2008 @ 5:13 pm

    Our group owner disappeared years ago, but she left everything but ability to delete the group to the moderators — but I don’t think she ever intended to leave the group without leaving any reasons why. Her email address went dead years ago.

    I’d give owners 15 days to respond to a third/final request for remaining as a group owner, giving 15 days each to respond to a first and a second request before sending that third/final request.

100. Alison said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:13 pm

     1.) I think a reasonable time frame would be somewhere in the 3 to 6 month frame. If an owner goes AWOL because of an emergency and is delayed for a month or so, it’s not fair to take the group away from them. Even three months in some circumstances is conceivable that the owner may be delayed. 6 months, on the other hand, should be a reasonable time whereby the owner should have their thoughts back on track and circumstances relatively taken care of to at least think of all the things that they left behind before they went AWOL. If they somehow forgot, then you can start the process and see if they are willing to keep their owner status.

     2.) I think the current owner should name someone that they trust or feel is capable and willing to do the job (who wants someone promoted who does not want the job?) and in lieu of that, Yahoo should promote – in a democratic way – a new co-owner or moderator. Then, if the owner is AWOL again for, say, another 6 months to a year on top of the original 6 months, then the co-owner should have full owner status.

     3.) You have worked with me on an issue of an AWOL owner and had democratically chosen (based on willing members who were voted in to the position by other members) and it worked out famously. The group is now moderated superbly and very little or no spam mail is coming into our group. Also, there is more chit chat that is on-topic and more traffic in the goup in general as well. (BTW, I did not want the position and it actually went to a wonderful person who is doing an excellent job!)

     4.) If the group owner appears again years later, they should be asked if they would like to co-own or at least moderate the group again, in shall we say, moderation-status. They need to post and/or moderate that group in whatever way Yahoo/or the group feels necessary to prove that they are back for good, and for a 6 month period of time, at least. Then and only then can they be co-owner or moderator (whichever they choose) on a permanent basis.

     5.)Since owners can do a few things moderators cannot, I suggest that owners that do not do much of anything be sent a bot and have to “put up” with it if they become lazy. When I say lazy, I mean they have appointed moderators to do their work and never participate in any way in the groups – including post regularly or even semi-regularly. If an owner participates before the bot sends out it’s message at 6 months, then no bot. Plain and simple. If the owner truly cares about the group, they’ll start participating again; if not, then they won’t want to be bothered anymore and go AWOL for good, thereby ensuring a willing, interested, and interactive owner be chosen. This is kind of pestering the original owner to do their job and to either stay or go – kind of like the proverbial “persistent widow” – something will eventually be done; either the owner will leave or will participate like they should.

     Just a few thoughts, thought of as I was writing this and of course would need to be modified and/or altered…

101. Tony said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:14 pm

     30 days sounds like a reasonable time if the owner’s emails are bouncing. Perhaps 60-120 days of total inactivity (unresponsiveness).

     The best way to deal with this would be to insist on succession planning — make an owner name a successor owner (or perhaps a short list) who would be authorized to take over in the event the owner disappears. The system could check for this and browbeat owners into doing this. But the system would also need to verify that the successor owner (or at least one from a list of successors) remains active, and if the successor owner becomes inactive it should go back and bug the current owner again to name a new successor.

     If that fails (and Murphy’s law says it will), then I would suggest that an effective successor list could be made up of existing moderators, with the succession in the order that they became moderators.

     But if there are no active moderators to choose from, then my suggestion would be that someone from the group should be allowed to petition to become the owner, and there should be a process and timeframe (say 30 days) for other people in the group to either approve or object to this new ownership. You wouldn’t need a majority of members to respond (a lot of group members may be passive), just some minimum threshold (like, > 1) and significantly more people who agree than who object (say, 2/3 agreement). This kind of approval process would also help prevent someone from maliciously taking over the group (this process would only apply if the owners are missing). If the group can’t actually agree on a new owner, then there’s no way for the Yahoo admins to know who to listen to and at that point the group will probably have to be terminated.

102. Bruce Koehler said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:14 pm

     1. Arrange that the owner can re-claim the group within 6 months (for example, a serious health issue or a car accident occurs) if it is re-assigned.

     2. The “non-attention” time should be a month – with provisions for the owner to extend it to 3 months IN ADVANCE OF HIS PLANNED ABSENCE IF at least one moderator is designated and active.

     3. Set up a way that the owner can designate two or three recommended replacements – prioritized. Make the owner update/re-affirm this list quarterly (or the process defaults to #4 below).

     4. Set up a voting structure where members can nominate the replacement, and then vote for the replacement.

103. Byron said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:15 pm

     In 2001, a group owner died, a group member took a copy of the death certificate to Yahoo offices, in Sunnyvale, Appointing a new group owner was denied. In 2003, I peeked in, the group was a major spam bucket using Yahoo space. At the time, I knew of 6 abandoned groups that were similar to several groups that I co-owned. I offered to take them over, clean them up, and find a new group grower, this also was denied.

     One group, the owner made a mistake and lost her group. So she started another and let the first group become a spam bucket.

     My best suggestion, get group owners to find a co-owner, One that you dare to let have the “Delete Group” button. I co-own 13 or 14 groups with one of two people. Some groups all 3 of us co-own the group. One group is over 1500 members. With 3 co-owners, the group can function
     if someone takes a Vaca or has to go to the Hospital.

     Byron

104. Rod said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:15 pm

     I think this is an excellent topic to cover. I’ve known of a Yahoogroup whose owner passed away, and there were no co-moderators. Eventually some people got onto the YG (it was an open group) and started to spam the living daylights out of it. Eventually evenyone left, but the spammers. As far as I know it is still there. Fortunately, only spammers are on it, and most likely none of them are even aware of the fact that no one is left to read their spam.

     Anyway, I’d like to address some of the questions that you’ve brought up. I believe that this extended period of inactivity should be measured in months, not weeks. It is entirely possible that someone might have to become inactive for a long period of time (hospitalization comes to mind, or the need to travel and not be able to be involved), so doing anything quickly I don’t think is wise.

     I do like your suggestion for giving notice to the group owner, in the two ways that you’ve mentioned.

     I think the first choice for group owner should be amount the moderators of the group. I realize that this might mean any member, but in all of the groups I own or moderate, new members are not automatically moderators, so those who are moderators are people who have already agreed to the responsibility.

     If the original owner should “come back” from their hiatus, then I recommend notifying the new owner that the original owner is back and wants to be re-instated. This is where it really gets sticky, because I can see how someone could hijack the group and try to claim to Yahoo that the original owner is delinquet in their duties. This is going to be the hardest thing to effectively and wisely implement. I confess I don’t envy Yahoo Groups team members for trying to come up with something that will work. I hope my suggestions are a least a little helpful.

105. Destiny Cruz said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:15 pm

     I’ve actually wondered what would happen to my group if something were to happen to me, ie. severe illness or even death, etc. I am active in my group and keep a pretty tight rein what goes on there. I would HATE to think it could just run rampant.
     I think it’s a great idea that a group owner could name someone in advance to ‘inherit’ the group if I disappeared for some reason. And if there is noone named I think the most active moderator should be next in line… obviously the owner trusted that person to help with the group. Failing that, the most active member should be. I mean if these people inherit it and don’t want that responsibility they at least would have the owner priviledges to transfer ownership to someone more interested in taking over.
     As for time frame before action is taken, I don’t think it should be a short time… could be an illness that WILL get better or a crisis that will pass. But I figure if the owner is MIA for 2 or 3 months then someone should be be at the helm. If the owner comes back WAY later, then the current owner could transfer ownership back but I don’t think it should be a guaranteed think for original owner to get it back. After all.. that abandoned it for a long time.

106. John said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:16 pm

     If the groups are open discussion lists where all members can post then:

     * What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?

     >> 30 to 90 days. I would suggest maybe allowing the owner to select a 30, 60, or 90 day time frame when the group is created, and allow it to be changed as needed. This allows some flexibility depending on a group’s needs, but also allows for a transition to occur if a group owner goes missing beyond a certain time frame.

     * Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?

     >> I would allow both options. The owner can name someone as a co-chair to take over the group if they are inactive. If no one is named or if the co-chair also goes missing, then the most senior, active member within the group should be promoted to run it.

     * What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?

     >> Seniority and amount of activity, of course, but also how knowledgeable a person is about the subject of the group based upon the quality of his/her input should be a factor. Maybe some sort of user ranking factor should be incorporated into this.

     * What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?

     >> I don’t think it would be fair to demote the person(s) who kept the group alive, but s/he should be allowed to also provide input into the running of the group.

     * What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.

     Groups that are all spam should just be shut down.

     If the groups are distribution-only lists, where only the owner can post, then those groups should be exempt from a transfer of ownership.

107. Miss Scribe who uses Y!M+ & Mods/Owns some Y! Groups said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:17 pm

     >> What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?
     * Thirty Days if all e-mail addresses of record are bouncing.
     * Sixty Days if they are not bouncing but no response is received when contacted by Yahoo! Groups.

     >> Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?
     * Current Group owners should be required to name someone as of a certain calendar date or Yahoo! will have the authority to do so if the need arises.
     * New Group owners should be required to choose between naming someone when the group is created or giving Yahoo! the authority to choose a new owner should the need arise.
     >> What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?
     * A combination based on seniority, consistent frequency of activity, existing Moderator status (on the Y! group in question or status as Moderator or Owner on one or more other Y! groups if Y! group in question lacks any moderators), and feedback from current group members. A rating could be assigned to the first two criteria I mentioned. Seniority could be based on time in group in relation to time group has existed (the second person to join, if still a member, would have the highest rating and the newest the lowest), while consistent frequency of activity could be based on a person’s average visits to the group’s website and their average number of postings in relation to the overall average for the group. The last two criteria I mentioned are pretty self-explanatory, but I would add that the Moderator/Other Group Moderator or Owner criteria could include the consideration of how long a person has held such a position, how many groups that person holds any of the positions in, and if they have ever shown signs of neglect toward any group they might own.

     >> What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?
     * The successive owner, whether by succession or appointment by Yahoo!, would hold co-owner status for six months, then if the former owner should reappear during those six months the former owner would have co-owner status with the successive owner for six months. If after that time the former owner has shown proper attention to the duties of owning the group the successive owner would revert to moderator status or even a newly created position of chief moderator or minority (as in 49% or less) owner. If the former owner does not show up during those six months, the successive owner becomes the only owner and has the right to name a successor or allow Yahoo! that choice should the need arise.

     >> What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.
     * The choice of successive owner should be changeable at any time and the choice to allow Yahoo! to name a successive owner should be revocable at any time, in so far as at the time of revocation the owner names a successive owner.
     * In the case of Y! groups with more two or more co-owners, the longest serving owner who has acted as an owner/moderator in the last thirty days would have the right to name a successive owner (or allow Yahoo! to pick one) should all owners cease to be active.
     ============================================================
     No, I’m not in the legal profession nor have I ever attended law school.
     Yes, I do logic puzzles and sudoku puzzles. Yes, I read the entire TOS page.
     ============================================================

108. Cathy said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:17 pm

     I totally agree that something must be done about truly abandoned groups, but I also see the ’stealing’ groups issue. I think from personal experience, (I have owned groups for many years now) that 6 months of absolutely no posting or anything from the owner may require a moderator or most participating member to take over. I know that a lot of people, myself included have serious bouts of depression where we cannot even fathom looking at emails, and I have personally taken months off from groups at a time. If I had recieved an email from YGroups to my group address, I would never have even seen it, since I delete mails by the thousand every week. A personal email however would have caught my eye, as long as it didn’t go into the spam folder.
     It is a catch 22 situation, and I am so happy that finally Yahoo is doing what they can to make their services all they can be! I truly appreciate all that you do! Thank you all very much!!!!!!

     On a different note, if you make it a requirement to have a second in command, it is just as easy to name yourself with a different ID. I have many IDs owning each of my groups, just in case I get locked out of my primary ID (usually for forgetting what my password is LOL). Having a permanent phone number available to contact us if anything should happen and we are inactive for 6 months may be useful, but a lot of people change their numbers every year or whatever. I know that what you all come up with will be the very best for us all! Thanks again!!!

109. Cathryn M said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:19 pm

     I, too was part of a group where the owner went AWOL and the group finally floundered and dissolved inspite of being a very large, very active group. I was motivated to create my own group, but this weighed heavily on me and I finally decided to get a co-owner. I put it to the group to have an election. The candidate had to be a member for a longer period of time (depending on the age of the group). There were nominations and an election. It worked really well… I know it’s a lot of work, but perhaps a moderator of the group with an AWOL owner could facilitate this kind of election with a time period to finalize the naming of a new owner. BUT… since one owner has gone AWOL, perhaps the stipulation should be that at least two people should be elected to replace the original AWOL owner.

     This is a really hot topic and I think a great many people have experienced it. I hope Yahoo will be able to resolve it in a fair manner for the members of it’s groups.

     Cathryn

110. Elizabeth said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:22 pm

     I’d also like to add that this replacement process should only be initiated if a group member reports owner abandonment to Yahoo. Nothing automated.

111. Marla said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:27 pm

     How about a poll of the membership to see who should be appointed moderator(s) when there is no clear line of succession. and I think the time period should be shortened when there isa death.

112. William Russell said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:28 pm

     Quite simply, if an owner is absent for 365 consecutive days he forfeits ownership of the group on the grounds of negligence. The first moderator ever appointed now has ownership of the group in such cases. If no moderator is appointed, the group is summarily deleted or presented to its most senior member. Nothing complicated. if an owner makes no effort to appoint a predecessor as in a moderator, he has no say in how Yahoo chooses to seek to salvage the group. I understand that things happen, butr everyone knows computer access can be gain free at any public library, and if an owner dies he/she certainly can’t notify anyone of this fact. A group should not lie in limbo forever when there is no living soul to that can notify of the circumstances.

113. mricur said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:31 pm

     Excellent!
     I had that problem!

     “Group owners who do not take any action in their group for an extended period of time”: Perhaps this is no bad thing and the group works beautifully like that. Yahoo should wait for 3 members claims before doing anything.

     Then, if you see pending issues very old, you can act.
     What is very old? Depends on the group: for groups with daily messages 2 months is very old. But for groups with 1 or 2 weekly messages, I feel only after 6 months you can act.

     If the owner does not answer in 2 months (for mega-holidays) and no “heir” is designed:
     1) I feel the new co-owner should be a full featured moderator instead without the power for deleting the group, at least, for 2 years. Then, if the old owner does not re-appear, he should be changed into new owner.
     2) You should choose the heir between the moderators (or members if without moderators) who had activity in the last 6 months according these criteria: older, expertise (has other ownerships).

     If the owner does appear before the 2 years gap, nothing happens. If he appears after that, well, he has a co-owner!
     Thank you for asking!

114. Melody Kiefer said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:33 pm

     I have been owner of the group I took over for a few years now. The orginal owner had asked me to please make sure the group stayed together if anything happen to her. She had cancer in her kidneys, was operated on. We didn’t hear from her for some time we called her did some search to find she had passed away. I had to get a hold of her daughter and showed her email of my promise to her mother. Yahoo said I had to have the owners send them email to sign the group over to me as if she could do that from beyond. So her daughter took care of it. We are just a small group of friends that just happen to have health problems and love doing crafts. We all have each others address and phone numbers to be able to keep track of each other if we don’t hear from one with in a week. We all voted on it and thought it be best that way especially after what happen to our orginal list mom. I myself have things set up so the group would go to a person I want to take over the group if something happen to me. My husband or one of my kids would know what to do so things will be handed over to the one I chose.

115. C.J. said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:34 pm

     What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?

     six months. Many are sick or have to tend to family etc. To make this time frame any lower would cause many to loose their group. Real life takes front stage for many.

     Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?

     promote a moderator. Many owners may not reply because they are deceased. others can no longer be online because of illness. A good majority of people on yahoo groups have no contact with members offline. Moderators have proven their trust because they are moderators.

     What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?

     Put a clause in the TOS. Send it out to everyone. Informing all of the new rule. Send this out weeks in advance to the change in the TOS. Then the original owner can become active on the list, and leave the rest up to the new owner and moderators. This way the group still has control. Plus it will fair better for Yahoo.

     What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.

     My other concerns is take overs. If a group is well established many may want to take advantage of such a group. if it looks as though there are no moderators as well. consider a complete dissolve of the group. many will want a group if it has many members, and is active and popular. or you may want to consider moving the members to another group. Another suggestion would be to let the oldest members be selected to moderate the abandon group. It’s a known fact that the ones closest to you always join your group first.
     I would not make someone owner if they ask for it. Go down your list of criteria.
     are they active?
     do they run other groups or moderate another group?
     how long have they been a member of the group?
     any complaints?

     Another thing for you to consider is if the group has less than 50 members you may just want to dissolve such a group if the group is only getting spam. I have seen abandon groups, and it’s not a pretty sight post wise.

116. David said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:36 pm

     Yahoo can seize inactive groups only if they wish to lose the quality. When Yahoo changed geocities URLs without warning a few years ago they ruined both user experience and their own income model. Layoffs and low valuation happen for a reason/s.

     A group owner is just that an owner. Like in the rest of life, if an owner disappears or dies without setting up a successor, then it’s tough luck. Since when the group were created there was not contingency, one cannot smoothly be put on after the fact.

     Creating a good system for inheritance for new groups makes sense, as does asking group owners to provide for succession now, when they are responsive. But old groups are stuck with the systems under which they were made if the owner is truly unresponsive. An owner should, being owner, be allowed to take off as long as they want without losing their group. Group owners never were owners only at Yahoo’s pleasure, and since Yahoo’s money keeps coming in as long as the group exists, an unresponsive owner should not get removed/replaced by Yahoo’s editors or anyone else. Otherwise don’t call them owners… call them “people Yahoo likes having volunteer to moderate and generate content for them.”

     Be Honest Yahoo. Might put you back in the search war.

117. Coach Anne said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:37 pm

     When the owner dies/goes missing, but the group continues (without spam overrun) to be even slightly active, then I suggest that remaining group members should have some say as to who takes over.

     Perhaps Yahoo! could select the top three candidates, based on seniority and/or activity and/or experience modding other groups, and then put it to a vote of teh existing group members.

118. Lady Venus aka Mary said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:37 pm

     Hi,

     I was asked to moderate Good Witch of the North Coven Yahoo group about 4 years ago. Immediately after i accepted the position of Moderator the Owner of the group disappeared. I have tried to contact him numerous times with no response. If there is a way I can take over as owner of the group I would like to do this. I have been active in the group and we have quite a few members who ask about him. Please help me with this.

     Thank you,

     Mary Brochu

119. Casey said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:40 pm

     A Minimum of 6 months of inactivity of the owner(maybe a year, but Definately no longer), regardless if email is bouncing or not. After the 6 months, then the Notices and Warnings to be emailed to the owner by Yahoo. If the Owner of the group has given Yahoo a physical Mailing address and or Phone number from creating the Yahoo Id, then this would be a time for yahoo to pick up the phone or send a certified letter, or both.

     If Owner replies and wants to keep the group, then nothing changes. If contact is made with the owner then he/she should be able to either name someone to appoint. or leave it in Yahoos hands. If NO CONTACT is made after, hmm, 3 attempts, 1 attempt per week for 3 weeks, then Yahoo, should be able to Post to the Group for a Poll and use that to appoint a new Owner. If there ARE Active Moderators, then the choices are the active Moderators.

     Now If a Member of an abandoned group, is the one asking to be made Owner, due to an abandoned Owner and the proof is there, then I believe THAT person should be seriuosly considered. At that point, Yahoo needs to look at the group and see that the Person asking for Ownership does indeed represent a true fan of that group, by looking at their past posts and longevity of membership of the group. Dont use a computer to decipher statistics. A Human needs to literally go through and make the Judgement and decide. Yahoo could post that “John Doe” will be taking Ownership of this group on or before this date MM/DD/YYYY, provided there are no objections within X-amount of days from this post.

     I would say that a member asking for ownership that HAS NOT been there at least 6 months, is not eligible until membership has passed that time frame and contact still hasnt been made with the Owner.

     Now, on the subject of “if the owner returns”. There are MANY reasons one could have left the group. That owner may not be the best choice for ownership for that group anymore. I would favor making that person a Moderator. Let the New Owner decide if they want to let the old owner back in. I also think that the Old owner should be able to appeal to Yahoo,…… WAIT! no. I take that back. If the Owner didnt reply to the notices and warnings, then its too bad for the old owner…. SOL for him/her. Owner had ample time.(should have maybe 3 months 90days from first attempt)

     I think the only way the owner should have an extended time is if they posted before they left that they would be gone for a while but ‘will be back’. If this kind of a post was made then, I think a minimum of a year from either the post was made, or from when they SAID they would be back.

     For those owners who have just clearly disappeared, after 6 months(or Definatley a year) of inactivity from the owner, the group will be considered Officially Abandoned. Then New Ownership can be considered, but only if its brought to Yahoos attention. I believe its not up to Yahoo to monitor all the groups for inactivity.
     New Ownership must be applied for.
     A certain criteria must be met.

     Now just recently, I myself asked yahoo to make me an owner of a group where their was only 1 owner and no mods. the last post from the Owner was way back in January of 1999. I’ve been a member there over a year.
     I got a reply that basicly said that “I regret to inform you that we cannot make you an owner due to the settings that were made when the group was created”. Personally I think this is BS. There are Very intelligent programmers all around… unfortunately im not one of them. Am I to believe that Yahoo doesnt have on record EVERY Owners Password?! I think the key word here is “Authority”. The right person in Yahoo with the ‘Authority’ should be able to look up that persons ID and find the Password that lets them in. How else can everyone log in??? It’s on record SOMEWHERE! So. Yahoo Authority, look up the Yahoo ID, find the password, log in, make the member an Owner, or even a Moderator with all the priveleges. Change settings if need to.
     Alternatively, Yahoo should be able to create a group with the same name, but located somewhere else, then be able to “Copy” or “Move” the Data(Members, Archives, Polls, Photos, files, databases) from the abandoned group to the NEW Location. Put the NEW Owner in there and let them go. then remove the old group.

     Okay, there’s my 2cents… then 2cents again.
     Thanks,
     Casey
     

120. Kim said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:40 pm

     I have to question the actions you’re mentioning above.

     1. Most importantly, I’m a Group Owner (several groups actually) that has invested significant time, effort and money into my groups. Going by your suggestions above were I to be involved in a serious accident I could return to find my group taken away from me. Does this make any sense to you?

     2. I’ve also had the experience where I’ve banned a member for violating the groups rules when we went copyright compliant. As a consequence to that, she complained to Yahoo and without any communication with me, both my ID and the group were deleted. When I questioned Yahoo about this they stated it was due to complaints received about my “abusive behavior” toward member (s). Banning someone from your group for violating your rules is a choice you have as an owner. to wind up being penalized by Yahoo that has no interest in my group, not to mention the time or money invested is a joke.

     3. From the above, you seem to be under the impression that we have some obligation to post at a frequency members decide is suitable. When did we start working for the members? I will be the first to state that my members make up my group and I am grateful for that, however, they don’t dictate the running of the group. If that is their wish they have the ability to create a group of their own.

     4. It would seem to me that Yahoo should be placing their concentration on closing groups that are violating copyright laws, promoting illegal activity, spamming groups and so forth and leave group Owners to run their groups as they see fit.

     In closing, I’ve run into a situation recently where I’ve been removed from my own groups without satisfactory explanation being given from the groups Technical support. Not just one of my ID’s was removed but three. According to Tech Support it must have been my Co-Owner and since that person happens to be my Husband that just didn’t happen. I believe the removal was done by Yahoo and due to several individuals that were removed for being abusive and not following our copyright rules. Fortunately, I’ve gotten smarter since those earlier days and have added my Husband as a Co-Owner so the risk is minimal to lose my group entirely. The fact that one person or a group of people could force the closure or change of Ownership of my Group or ANY group whether it be due to real life concerns, removing the Owners ability to temporarily pay attention to the group or malicious action by a member or members is frankly ridiculous.

     Kim

121. Darlene said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:44 pm

     1) time frame should be after 3 months of no activity, 1st message sent to owner, if no resonse from owner after 30 days, 2nd message sent to owner, 3rd and final notice sent to owner 30 days after 2nd notice that action is being taken within 48 hours to install new owner. this gives the person 5 months to respond, more than enough time to check in.

     2) moderator should be elected by poll,

     3) if no moderator, group poll should be taken to see about new owner.

     4) previous owner retains membership status but new owner decides if allowed to be moderator/co-owner.

     5) Groups that have more than 100 members who are soft bouncing, notice sent to owner to reset bouncing status. Hard bouncing notice sent to owner to remove member from group if reseting bounce status does not work.
     if no action taken after 60 days, the member is removed from the group.
     the group i am in has 1518 members …….. 550 of them bouncing, some since 2003. the owner refuses or can’t be bothered to reset bouncing status.
     i have repeatedly ask the group owner to reset / remove these members since it slows down mail delievery. she has never reset bouncing status, and she will not allow me to do so as moderator.

122. Dianna said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:44 pm

     I am 52 and have been a Yahoo group owner for many years. I agree something should be put in place but only in the event of the death of the owner. Like Edie in the above post I too would be VERY upset to come back after a long bout with my illness and find my groups which I had worked so hard to establish are now owned by someone else.

     I am a shut-in due to my disability. We do not have spam in any of my groups as I have them set up where I must ok every request for membership. However, when an owner passes away I can see why some would want something done in that instance.

     Personally I very strongly disagree with any group being taken over without several steps put in place to protect the owner. 30 days is not anywhere near enough time as I and other disabled group owners I know have been offline due to our severe illnesses for as long as a year. I feel that allowing people to take over groups due to the owners absence would only encourage unscrupulous people to take over estabished groups at a mass rate.

     Nothing stops people from organiazing their own groups should they not be happy with the group’s management or lack of the owner’s presence. REMEMBER Yahoo groups are free! There are also several Yahoo e-groups online to help you advert your group(s)

     All I have to say is I put a lot of effort into making and esablishing my groups, all in good faith. I have complete confidence that Yahoo will not support handing over groups built by someone else because the owner isn’t always available. I’m sure they know that should they allow this they will be inundated with emails and phone calls from both present and former group owners!

     My advice to people is stop whining and build your own groups!!

123. Grizzly said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:44 pm

     There are a an awful lot of hungry sharks circling here, just waiting for some hapless owner to fall in the water. 30 Days? Lots of people lose their Internet connection or their computer and can’t pay to replace it, and are off for longer than that. Should we be so eager to snatch their groups out from under them? What if they are in hospital, or in jail?

     Here’s what I think – When a sole owner hasn’t logged into Yahoo for at least 90 days, and their email address on file for that group is bouncing, Yahoo then, on request from a group member, sends a post to the list, and to every known email address for the owner. Repeat for a total of three times, 30 days apart. Meanwhile, someone gets made a moderator with limited powers, able to approve posts and members if the group is set to require that.

     If no answer 30 days after the third attempt, a request is made on the list for volunteers to become owner. If there is only one, they get it. If more than one, a poll is set up to run for 30 days that group members can vote in. Winning requires a majority of votes cast; if no candidate has it, the top two have a runoff.

     For the period of the poll, close the group to new members. The existing members thus get a say in who gets the group, but don’t get to stack the group with new phony members just to win.

     It will be a very rare owner who comes back after that much time and wants his group back. If he does – tough. The group has moved on.

124. Dan Baier said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:45 pm

     I think there is merit in rethinking the issue of who “owns” the group. From my perspective, it’s really the members of the group. The “owner” is really the chief facilitator/traffic cop. I suspect that few groups really thrive where someone acts as a dogmatic owner.

     That said, I think you the time interval should be set so as to make sure that moderator functions such as membership and email approvals occur promptly, or the group owner should be encouraged/required to name a moderator to assist or move aside.

     If it comes to having to pull someone out of the group for the role, you might want to consider a process (using the poll function perhaps) of letting the group select the person – the most active may not always be the best choice.

     Dan

125. Administrator said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:48 pm

     Wow – it’s great to see the immediate response this post elicited!

     While I haven’t read through all of the comments yet, I assure you that I will…as well as all comments received over the next several days. We want to hear from as many of you as possible before making any decisions (and we’ll post an update once we have).

     Thanks and keep ‘em coming!

     Best,
     Jami

126. Greg said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:50 pm

     I always appoint at least one co-owner and more than two moderators in case I have to be away for a while and someone has to handle the duties. In other cases where there is no one else, I think the people who have either contributed the most or been on the roster the longest, should be given the opportunity to take the reins.

127. Vyasamoorthy said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:52 pm

     Reasonable time frame of inactivity: one month. Mine is a very active group with 40-50 messages (real discussion) a day from about 450 members. If there is no owner to take care of maintenance many members will unsubscribe and the efforts in building the group will be list. Therefore in high-activity groups one month of waiting is more than enough.
     Order of preference of appointing a new owner:
     1. Inheritor of the if any specified.
     2. One among the moderators upon some kind of evaluation as to how good he has been.
     3. If no moderators are available then send a special message to all members to recommend some active member as owner and select one among them through say some poll / popularity etc.
     Vyasamoorthy.

128. RS said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:52 pm

     “What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?”

     Six months to a year tops. Leaning more towards a year though. Also included should be the option for an owner to place the group on a “Hiatus status”–a setting which means, yes I know my group is dead, I will be back soon to work on it, please stop sending me reminder e-mails every (x) months. They would need to specify a time frame when selecting this status, which would display the ETA for a return to all site visitors, and also inform Yahoo to forestall inactivity notices until after the selected date.

     “Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group? ”

     Yahoo should send an e-mail to the moderators (or the group as a whole, if no moderators exist) and ask for volunteer nominees. Then you get people who actually want the job, instead of a random selection. Then there should be a limited voting period where members can vote, Yahoo closes the poll and ‘elects’ the successor, defaulting to their own choice when a tie results or no votes occur. Spontaneously electing a random member who may not be up for the task (or may be a spam bot) is a bad idea.

     “What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”? ”

     See above.

     “What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later? ”

     Part of me says tough noogies. If the process has already taken place, they abdicated responsibility, and left the group to hang. They have no rights at that point. Add to this the fact that once the list is given over, there is no obligation on the part of the new owner to necessarily keep the same name to the group, or otherwise not re-imagine the list in some way. It is fundamentally “not theirs” any further at that point. I could be persuaded another direction by a reasonable arguement, but largely, if they are going to be that neglectful of the community they created, would you really want them back? If there’s an active owner in place who feels differently, problem solved. I could see having an internal list of viable excuses as to why they person in question would be allowed to retake his/her own group–such as having been imprisoned, the current mod being inactive or the group being on hiatus three times in arow, whatever, but largely, I think once its someone else’s you’d then be taking it away from an active mod on the sole premise that the original owner is “back”. For that matter, what if the original owner has a new e-mail address? How do you verify its not a scammer? No, I think once gone, you’re gone. So long as a live person can review the exceptional cases promptly (immediate elevation), and the existing owner agrees, where’s the problem?

     “What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here?”

     Thank you for your considerate development process. Please tell the profile team to mirror your process. I like it!

129. frank said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:53 pm

     i have already taken over a group threw yahoo customer care useing the poll feature and had me create a poll to those interested in taking over the group the one with the most votes got it after i sent the results to yahoo and that worked out just fine three abandoned groups in my area were restablished this way and are doing just fine but there was one group in my area that has been abandoned for some years i have been told the person who started passed away the trouble is he disabled the poll feature i am wondering why yahoo couldn’t reactavate the poll feature of any group it is disabled if it is proven the oringinal owner is no where to be found and does not have a yahoo email account any longer because what happens is the spammers take over and use the group for spam

130. NatalieNicole said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:53 pm

     1) 30 days is a good starting point for notifying the owner that their group may be given to another member if they don’t reply within 45 days.

     To allow for hospital stays, vacations and internet connection issues (certainly during economic strains at present) the original owner shouldn’t be removed. Rather, the new administrator should become co-owner, without right to remove the original owner unless said individual posts abusive content. Groups where the owner has truly left, however, would then be able to enjoy full use of the group under the new owner.

     2) Both. However, as you know, when groups are created people are invited over time. Specifying a person to inherit ownership when the group is first created would be all but impossible until you know who’s joining. Perhaps a follow up message to the owner after 1 to 3 months of activity, inviting them to select a secondary owner in the event of anything preventing their own administration. And whomever the owner selects would, of course, need to be flexible so that the owner could remove or shift their selection dependent upon that person’s continued activity and interest in the group.

     Yahoo should also have the ability to poll the members to select a new leader, using the group’s polling function.

     4)What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?

     They should still be given access as a co-owner, as it was their intellectual property that the group’s real estate was founded on. Their delayed reclaiming should not, however, undo all the good of the person who took responsbility for the group in their absence, and thus the new person should retain co-ownership. Let them both resolve it from there themselves.

     nng

131. Francine said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:55 pm

     This is a great subject. So happy to see something being done about this.
     Answers:
     1) No less than 6 months to a year. In case there is an illness or something
     of that nature.

     2)Promote a moderator, preferably one who has been there the longest.

     3)If there is any possible way you can check to see who’s been on the group the longest, that would be a good way. But I think, either asking the group to nominate someone or ask someone to step up to the plate, would be good.

     4) Too bad for that owner. I mean seriously, who leaves for that period of time, doesn’t check in, or anything? They may do it again, they may not, but
     it wouldn’t be fair to someone who has put so much time and effort into a group to have it taken away just because the absentee owner decides to return. The original owner doesn’t deserve to get the group back.

     5)I’m going to quote C.J. here because this person is right on about the concerns and actions. Sometimes, dissolving a group would be better
     than anything else you could do.
     “I would not make someone owner if they ask for it. Go down your list of criteria.
     are they active?
     do they run other groups or moderate another group?
     how long have they been a member of the group?
     any complaints?

     Another thing for you to consider is if the group has less than 50 members you may just want to dissolve such a group if the group is only getting spam. I have seen abandon groups, and it’s not a pretty sight post wise.”

     I have several moderators on my group. My husband is retired and we like to travel. These gals, one is my daughter, take care of things while I’m out of contact. I truly don’t know what I would do without them.

     Good luck and I’m looking forward to seeing what you decide to do.

132. Diane Hare said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:58 pm

     In less active groups access to a tidy archive may continue to be of value. It’s important than such archives neither be lost nor become flooded with SPAM if continued posting is allowed.

     I was saddened when access to the original Adam & Even (cross-stitch) sampler Archive was lost in a move to duck SPAM-ers.

     I see clearing out old feces to be a higher priority than approving moderated messages within-the-day. When neither is accomplished, the group is in need of at least a pro-tem guardian.

133. WitchDreary said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 5:58 pm

     1. 3 months
     2. Owner should have a choice within a month of opening the group to judge who would be best as second chair.
     3. How many groups do they own already, participation, and willingness to take over.
     4. Offer the group to the top participating members and give the owner notice that their going to lose ownership within 30 days of group notification.
     5. What about group owners that just “check in” long enough to reply then disappear again? How many groups can you be an owner of and still be able to live up to an owners responsabilities? The owner should be the one to approve and deny membership and if they don’t have the time for that task then they should not be owning all those groups in the first place.

134. Kathy Jackson said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:01 pm

     I think that Yahoo should leave individual groups alone unless the members contact them to inform them that there is no active owner. Some of the problems with missing owners could be avoided if yahoo had an easy way of validating members/owners so that they can be identified in ways other than a particular email address. For example, if nunuggets group owner’s email is nuggets@XYZisp.com but for some reason they lose that addy due to changing providers or whatever, or get locked out for some reason, they will have a terrible time trying to log in and handle their group. But if they could have the option of an alternate means of identification as the owner, such as a special password or system such as answering some predetermined questions that were set up when they established the group, it would still be accessible to them.
     I think many owners might be missing simply because they can’t get back in.
     If yahoo decides that they MUST take some across the board action, even though I suspect that most groups do NOT have a missing owner, then make the time frame at least 6 months that the owner must be truly missing and at least 6 months that the original owner can come back and reclaim ownership. I’d be pretty ticked off if something came up in my life and I was unable to be involved in the group for a while and yahoo just handed it over to someone else. I’m the one that started the group, promoted the group and babied it all this time. I have 2 co-owners (they don’t have the option of deleting the group) and a few moderators. The group runs just fine, even when I’m gone for a while. It doesn’t seem right or fair to change the rules now after years of nurturing the group just because “some groups” have a MIA owner situation.

135. Sue said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:01 pm

     If a group owner is totally non-responsive for 30 days, they should be replaced. The replacement should be chosen from the moderator(s). If the owner took the trouble to appoint moderators, these were people the owner trusted to help run the group. If there are no moderators, maybe the group could vote on someone to replace the owner. If the original owner reappears, they could be given co-owner status.

136. Monique said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:03 pm

     I think this is a good point and the following thoughts come to me:
     1. signs of an owner who disappeared are: pending members and messages that get ignored for 3 months, owner’s mailbox is bouncing because it’s full or other technical issues for 3 months, owner who doesn’t respond to 2 or 3 messages from yahoo over a period of a month or 6 weeks.
     2. if group members are asking for Yahoo’s assistence in a serious way with proof of several attached messages where it’s clear that things go wrong in a group, Yahoo should not hesitate to investigate the group and disappearance of it’s owner, even if there are no pending messages or even if the 3 month-period is not yet over.
     3. If the group owner can’t be reached by Yahoo, yahoo should ask the group members and moderators if they know where the owner is. In a group that has worked well where the owner suddenly is gone, usually at least a few members might know why. In case several members claim that this owner is long-term hospitalized there might be a system possible where someone becomes temporary owner with all necessary features such as approving members and post, but without the ability to delete the group or demote the original owner. Hospitalized is only an example, this also goes if owners have serious internet issues or so, anyway something different then just ignoring the group.
     4. I think while Yahoo investigates seniority of members, at the same time they can investigate what is being posted to group and who posts spam or other unacceptable content, and those should automatically be excluded from replacement ownership.
     5. If a group has moderators who are willing to take the role of owner, they should have this chance first.
     6. I think in groups that have been abandoned by their owner and are overrun by spammers etc. the replacing owner should be appointed on a trial basis at first and should be able to request help from Yahoo if they think they need it, at least for a few weeks.
     7. Once the owner has been replaced and the new owner’s trial period is over, I think it’s no longer up to yahoo what happens to the old owner if this person suddenly re-appears, but to the new owner. the way I see it, before an owner is truly replaced it takes almost a year and who knowswhat happened to the old owner in between.
     8. I think as long as a group runs smoothly there is no reason for yahoo to ask each individual owner/co-owner to reply to a message. this whole thing should only come into play once yahoo checks and notices a group is no longer being taken care of or if members start complaining.
     then there is also the issue of groups who have open membership where members come and leave and spam as they wish. From the first appearance such group may seem well-organized while in fact it isn’t.
     In such a case only participants of that group are able to alert yahoo.
     Last, I think it’s wise for each owner, if he has persons that he trusts with that group, to assign them the necessary moderator privileges in case he should lose his ID, email address, pass away or for any other eventuality. that would come down to the same thing as naming a successor.
     So much for my thoughts on this.

137. Kathy said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:03 pm

     I am glad this issue is being addressed. I am concerned, though, on how a replacement would be chosen. Without input from the group members it would be difficult to pick a person that would be best for the group. Perhaps using the survey feature to get input from the group members would help to ensure that the new owner would have the support of the group.

     I am also concerned about the length of time before a replacement would be selected. I would think that a period of 6 months of neglect would be a sufficient time to be assured that an owner has abandoned the group. But not all inactivity on the part of an owner can be assumed to be neglect. I occasionally get people requesting to join my group. I expect those people to answer a small set of questions prior to my accepting their request. I let the request expire if the person does not respond. To an observer it may mean that they think I am not on top of the requests, which is not accurate. I would hope that there would be a sufficient length of time for an owner to respond to Yahoo before a group would be labeled abandoned.

     Lastly, I am concerned about having a group member designated as a new owner on the date of the creation of the group. A lot of times, early members later become inactive, or even leave groups. I think a group is often a fluid entity, and the owner-designate would have to be fluid as well. It has also been my experience that having an owner chose a new owner without input from membership can be a problem, especially when that new owner wasn’t a moderator or even a very active member. Again, i think having a poll of membership, perhaps between current moderators or most active members, or both, would be the most workable solution.

     Thanks for letting us have input to this very important question.

138. Kel Phoon said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:03 pm

     Perhaps Yahoo should create some simple options for an owner when setting up a new group, with some of the options forcing others:
     - Maximum number of members, or unlimited (like Jim said, more than XX requires a co-owner)
     - Co-owner (if any)
     - Moderators; indicate if a moderator is tagged for promotion to co-owner in the event that the owner becomes inactive
     - Number of Months of Owner Inactivity to Trigger Moderator Promotion

     Allow the owner(s) to change these settings after setting up the group. Many groups grow quite quickly and require different management responsibilities.

     Owners should be told that they have the responsibility of setting appropriate parameters for automated changing of the guard. Owners who have great visions for their new groups should take this responsibility to heart; it is like setting up a living will, and like a will, it saves the survivors from unnecessary anguish should the owner pass away or become inactive for any reason.

     I think allowing owners to set and reset these parameters is important, since no one size fits all groups, and as has been pointed out, posting frequency of members and owners varies tremendously depending on the topic and membership, and it’s not a linear relationship to the size of the group. Some high-membership high-volume groups have a solid moderator team and very little input from the original owner, and that is ok.

     Also, as has been pointed out, sometimes those co-owners and moderators may wish to keep an original owner in the owner group, even if just to honor them, or to have the membership not forget where the group came from. Maybe there’s a better place for that (like the homepage), but it’s hard to foresee all of the various groups’ needs, so if as much as possible can be owner-defined, I think that’s better.

     This also removes the need for figuring who should be allowed to take over a group after an owner becomes inactive — this has so many possible decision parameters that I think it’s hard to automate.

139. Sharon Villines said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:04 pm

     Apologies if this gets posted twice. I think I hit close window instead of send.

     I think there should be two processes: (1) other moderators and members can report an active group that needs a functioning owner, (2) an automatic testing by the server of active groups with no active owner. In each instance, I would expect an owner to be on email at least once a week. To wait 6 months for a response is much too long. No response in two weeks, yahoo engages the group to promote a moderator or appoint an owner if there are no other moderators.

     In the interests of sustainable cyberspace, groups should be either active and well-tended or deleted. Our community uses lists for a wide variety of things but sometimes a person will move out of town, forget how to access Yahoo, and a list is sitting there that no one can manage. There seems to be no recourse but to abandon it.

     In another instance I desperately needed the help of a group on an Adobe software program. The owner never responded to my request to join — not rejected, just paid no attention. It was the only group on that software. I had to go to Google and join a group there — which I hate doing because managing groups on one site is much more convenient.

140. Pat said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:04 pm

     I make it a policy to always have at least one other owner for all my groups. This is to hopefully prevent this type of problem from arising.

     But, I understand that not everyone wants to do that. So, I commend the Yahoo team for trying to address this issue.

     The problem is, that how long to wait really is something that is group dependent. For a really active group, having no active owner for 2 weeks might be terrible, whereas for other groups, they can go a year with no problems. Would it be possible for a group to have settings that are determined by the owner for these items? kind of like now we determine how messages are delivered, who can post, etc? That way, it is up to the listowner. Then, Yahoo could set an upper limit, or say, a year, and after that, then they can step in and take action.

     As for the concern that the most active poster might be a bully, is it not possible to see that from the person’s posts? and, thus exclude them from being allowed to take over the group?

141. Ron said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:04 pm

     what yahoo should also do is delete groups that are
     clearly abandoned,after all if there has been no legit group
     sctivity (or no activity at all) for 3 or more years
     that should be a sign that the group is dead.
     I have come across groups were the last posting was
     the year 2000 so you think that no
     activity for that long anyone should know that a group like that
     is abandoned.
     also what about groups who’s owner no longer has an yahoo id
     or like others have said were group owner has passed on

142. ginger said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:05 pm

     I feel you need to make the certain the group is inactive. Some groups go in cycles due to their topics. In case where the only moderator has died, then someone who has been active on the group should be allowed to take over. I think yahoo can track this. I have made sure there is at least one other moderator on each of my groups to hopefully avoid this problem.But if the owner of the group cannot be reached and there is not activity then why can’t yahoo ask if someone wants to take over.If there are no replies to this, then it should be deleted, due to the cycling of some groups and their topcis.
     I know it must be a difficult topic. Looking forward to how this will be handled.

143. Brad said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:05 pm

     Well this can be a problem but also time should be given for a lot of stuff can happen to someone such as car accidents – illnesses and such with a long recovery period. If there is a moderator in place they should be able to reply to mail and approve members and such. I also think that a reasonable amount of time with not hearing from the owner at all in any shape or form should be at least 4 months before anything be done. Then for Yahoo to contact that owner and if they don’t respond back to Yahoo in a reasonable amount of time say 2 or 3 weeks then the group should be turned over to the moderator or one of the members of the group. I know I own 6 groups myself and I have a co-owner in place along with moderators too of whom I trust.

144. ici said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:07 pm

     I like the idea of waiting 60-90 days before allowing something to happen. I feel that if a modearator is considered inactive, someone from the group can petition Yahoo and get it looked at. If the owner hasn’t responded within 60 days than someone else can fulfil the role. I think the idea of only allowing someone who an owner/moderator of another list is flawed though. What about groups were no one else owns/moderates other lists? Should that group be allowed to die out because no one is able to theoretically fill the shoes? I think there should be a petition by Yahoo to step in and make ownership available to anyone who can show reason to continue the group.

145. Shayleia said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:12 pm

     1. I think that in the case that if an owner becomes absent and has not responded to requests from Yahoo within a 6 month time frame that Yahoo take the next step in re-assigning ownership of the group.

     2. Yahoo should not choose for the group. Yahoo should send a general email to the group letting the group know that the owner has not responded and it is time to pick a Successor for the group. Asking all current members for a vote on who that Successor should be. If a group is active and not a host for spam, then the group will know who would be the best candidate to represent that group in regards to consistent activity of posting, attention to fairness, the ability to get along with the other members, online-personality, etc. That way a bully, trouble-maker or spam host could not take over the site.

     3. I believe that when an owner signs up to start a group that they should be required to choose a first and second Successor to take over the group in their absence. This should be a requirement within the first 6 months of starting the group, giving the owner plenty of time to get acquainted with the members so a successful Successor(s) can be chosen . That way if an owner dies or abandons the group, the Successor “chain of command” could be implemented. If the named Successors don’t want to, or can’t take over the group, then send it to the group for a vote.

     4. In the interim of selecting a Successor, a group moderator, by senority, could be the acting-Successor until the permanent Successor is chosen. This would help to keep things running as smooth as possible during the transition. If there are no moderators than a temp moderator could be chosen by the group until a Successor is chosen.

     5. I think that once an owner has been replaced that they NOT be allowed to regain ownership in that group. Once abandoning a group they will have lost their privilege of running that same group in the future. They should be made aware of these rules of transition upon signing up with Yahoo.

146. Kim said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:15 pm

     I’m sorry.. I’ve had more thoughts.. bear with me here. My first post was reactive to Yahoo butting in – sorry, that’s how I see it.

     I’ve been a group Owner since probably 2000 but a member of many groups prior to that. I became an Owner because I couldn’t stand the hand slapping and scolding handed down by many group Owners that treat their members like children and not adults so I opened my own Groups. After my first incident with Yahoo closing me down to the maliciousness of several that were banned, I closed my groups, all of them that were Yahoo based and opened a Forum group. That forum now has close to 12,000 members. I only recently returned to Yahoo as a group Owner because I took over a group in January that I had been a member of since it almost started and the old Owner no longer wanted. I only remain here because that’s what the members desire, not because I choose to. If necessary, I already have a Domain waiting to transfer that group as I have previously.

     Anyway…

     Most of us have read the news. We’ve seen, see or know someone that is struggling during these hard times. I’ve had members write that they may disappear due to their electric or cable being shut off or needing to find work and they may not be as active. This could happen to any one of us that is a Group Owner. While everything else in life is stressful this is the one area of anyone’s life that should not hold that same stress level. You’re right, members make the group but without leadership and direction many groups would falter and no longer exist. I firmly believe that if a group is TOTALLY INACTIVE for a year I don’t see why Yahoo shouldn’t just delete it and move on. If someone is coming to Yahoo wanting the “name of a group” then I’m sorry, I think you need to be questioning the necessity for it. Why not create a new group with a new or similar name and run it yourself with your own rules. This closing down, having votes/polls, etc is ridiculous.

     Furthermore – I’m not responsible if my members are bouncing and when you have a large group you can spend quite some time un-bouncing members. As a PSP Group, I have enough on my shoulders to make sure that my members are posting only copyright compliant images, following the Artists TOU which changes quicker than most change their undies that I’m not about to be held responsible for a members mail bouncing. That is the members responsibility.

     Honestly, unless I’m violating Yahoo’s TOU, which clearly we’re not.. then I think Yahoo needs to do as it was intended and that’s manage the infrastructure and respond to complaints of illegal content or copyright violation. If a member is unhappy with a group be it the rules, lack of posting, or any other thing they may not like they have the ability to leave and create their own group. If we are to be honest here, this isn’t a discussion about dead groups, because people will have started a group and gone elsewhere, this is a discussion about active groups and people trying to take them over.

147. paul said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:16 pm

     If an owner abandons a group, the group should die, not be re-assigned. If the members of the abandoned group want the purpose of the group to live-on, they should start another group and invite everyone to join.

     If the group was the original idea of the owner, and started by the owner, and facilitated by the owner, why would you assume that the owner’s wishes are not to simply let the group die via abandonment?

     It’s the order of natural selection. Groups that have active owners and membership will rise to the top, and those who don’t will settle into the abyss.

     What will result is a bunch of people trying to gain power and access by lobbying to get ownership of abandoned groups.

     I feel this is a horrible idea. Let the process of natural selection work, let some live and some die. The groups who re-invent themselves after abandonment will be better formed, better managed, and have better information due to the natural weeding-out of old members and old information.

     Paul Smith

148. C.J. said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:16 pm

     Of course you could always direct it at the owners of the groups now before this problem even arises again. The older groups you can’t help but why can’t Yahoo direct the question of what to do if you go bye bye to the owner when they are creating the group? two little questions is all you have to ask.

     1. If you are gone inactive in your group, at what time would you like Yahoo Groups to appoint a new owner? 30 days_ 3 months_ 6 months_

     Would you prefer that YahooGroups select a new owner from you moderators_ or oldest members_

149. Melinda said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:17 pm

     What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted? I would recommend 6 months – with at least one month extra after Yahoo contact.

     Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group? In some cases, the moderators are not interested in being moved to group owner. I am a moderator in two groups, but I am not interested in being an owner. If there is not a successor named, I would suggest asking the moderators, if any, who would be the best person. If there are no moderators, I would suggest asking the members who they want.

     What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later? They should not be removed from the membership list. They will still be a member and may take over co-ownership again if the group decides to let them. I would be very hesitant about allowing them full ownership again.

     What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? There should be a way to designate if this a family or closed group. Some of the closed groups are all but inactive for long periods. I have a group I am a member of that if we have 5 posts a year, we are busy. It seems to be we get really busy at times of family crisis – The reason we started the group was because of a tornado that hit my grandmother’s town. I am certain there are other groups like this. This is the way to keep the family informed without tying up phone lines during crisis situations.

150. Mermaid Master said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:21 pm

     I think this is a wonderful idea but I would suggest that two additional criteria be involved before a new owner is selected. First, the group should be active. I have groups that are totally inacitve and have been for months or years. I see no advantage in having someone else come in and take over. Second, I strongly support the idea that the first candidate to become a co-owner should be a moderator IF that person is also active in the group or, if no one meets that criteria, then choose from the combination of seniority and activity.

151. Kathy said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:22 pm

     I think this is a good idea. I think the members should have the ability to request that yahoo look into the status of an owner. If they can prove that an owner has died then transfer the membership accordingly.

     I would think that on groups where the owner has medical issues they should do the right thing and make sure that someone is able to take their place during their absence.

     I think a poll of the members would show who would be good for the group and who would be a bully. Yahoo might also consider that in the case of a new owner that they reserve the right to transfer membership if the new owner abuses their power. If there isn’t any response from the members then close the group so that unsuspecting people don’t try to join it.

     Kathy

152. Brandon J. Van Every said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:22 pm

     I would say, if moderation requests are pending, and not dealt with by the moderators or list owner, then in 30 days a new moderator with nearly full powers should be promoted by some expeditious mechanism. List ownership could be transferred later, like 3 months. The most important thing is that someone needs to step in to moderate quickly, regardless of whether the list owner is in the hospital, traveling in foreign lands, or just a blowoff. I don’t get any of this stuff about people taking six months or longer to resolve the issues. I have trouble imagining that the people saying that, are living in the real world or have taken significant moderation responsibilities for their groups. It’s a job, it has to get done, and languishing 6..12 months in limbo is not doing the job.

153. Brad said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:23 pm

     Sounds good. That’s an interesting situation I’d never thought of. I
     noticed something in the blog though…

     “Alternatively, we are also considering giving group owners the ability to
     name someone as their predecessor should their activity/moderation be
     inactive for the specified time frame (similar to a living trust).”

     Don’t you mean, “…name someone as their successor…”?

     As to your questions…
     Time frame. I say give it at least 60 days or longer. People do have computer problems that restrict their abilities to get online and they also could conceivably go away for weeks at a time.

     Both. Going forward I think there should be a Vice-Owner appointed to each group but for existing groups choosing among moderators seems like a fair practise.

     What if there is no moderator of trustee? Put it to a group vote. What you’re trying to do is see to it that the group membership is best served here so why not let them decide who will lead them. At that time however, force the new owner to appoint a trustee.

     If they return? Tough cookies! They’re obviously not paying attention to let something like this happen so how committed can they be? If they insist on being reinstated, again, put it to a group vote.

154. OldOnliner said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:23 pm

     If you get no reply and there are no current moderators, I think you should just delete the group. Period. Put a warning on top of the group’s home page. Send a warning to the -owner address. As final notice, insert a post into the group’s message stream, CC’ing the -owner address.

     I would base moderator choice on (1) activity level and (2) length of membership and (3) number of other groups the moderator owns or mods.

     I would set the notifications such:

     Initial – 60 day notice.
     Second – 30 day notice.
     Third – 14 day notice.

     At 10 days, start a countdown on the the group’s home page, incrementing each day. At this point contact and confirm that selected moderator accepts choice based on formula (you decide weighting factor) above. If there are no other moderators, or no existing moderator wishes to accept ownership responsibility, delete the group after 10 days.

155. amboutwe said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:29 pm

     60 days is adequate for a ownership change. Group owners should be able to name a ‘trustee’ but not forced to name one. Moderators should have first dibs at being the new owner if the current owner becomes inactive. Members should be polled to elect a new owner unless there is only one moderator. If the current owner reappears at anytime, the group should have the responsibility of handling the situation. If the group wants to take a chance, the new owner can assign ownership (or moderator) to the old owner. I agree this should not be automated and must be reported by at least a few members of the group in question before Yahoo! assists. However if the owner has a habit of abandoning groups, they should be forced to assign a ‘trustee’, moderator, or co-owner. The group should be notified at each step and their feedback considered when handling an ownership change.

156. Bill Dickerson said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:32 pm

     I think thirty days sounds about right but you may want to look at the amount of activity.

     You might consider an outsider sort of like a Mentor to temporarily take control of the group until a more permanent solution can be found.

     The Group Mentor could promote someone to be co-owner by observing the Group.

     The Mentor could pass the baton when things are running smoothly.

157. Susan said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:32 pm

     I’m an owner of two groups. One of the is used for news updates on a specific actor (I do have a co-owner for this one) and the second group the original owner made me and four other people co-owners. I’ve set myself up to get notifications when someone or a message is pending and answer them immediately. Even though I’m not an active member since my divorce and I work 10 hrs a day, I do try to upkeep the groups that I own. I think an inactive owner should be given timely notice to react. Thank you for reading.

158. Verle said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:33 pm

     I am moderator of a group where the only owner has asked to be removed from the group and has turned of email. I have emailed him directly asking him to promote me to owner so I can remove him as he desires but he fails to reply or take action. I would much prefer to take over ownership rather than create a new group and try to get all the members to join a new one. I have tried all the proper methods but no results yet so anything Yahoo can do to make it possible would be great. I think an owner should be considered inactive if there is no action other for six months or more or if the owner has requested no email. As a moderator I cna ensure pending mail ius taken care of and invite new members, etc. but there are still things I cannot take care of including removing an owner who has requested to be removed via email directly to me.

159. JoD said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:33 pm

     I own 2 groups myself and belong to several others. I live in frozen tundra land in winter. I prefer to spend those months in warmer weather. This makes 3-4 months without internet connection. Sometimes I can check in but not very often. Many people I know spend the winters without internet connection.

     I think 6 months with an inactive owner would be fair.

160. Monique said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:34 pm

     I read someone’s suggestion of creating some settings that the owner of a group can set, such as after x amount of time where owners appear to be inactive should step in or things like that. Sounds like a very clever plan.
     I was shocked when I read that some people think if the group owner disappears the group should just be deleted and the members ought to find or create a new group to replace the old one. Archives with posted messages that often prove to be useful resources would get lost, not to mention that especially groups who have been running smoothly maybe for many years also have an atmosphere, a circle of friends and also messages and pictures and databases and who knows what that remind them of where they came from or where it all began or who can say, deleting that and just moving on when the owner disappears has been the way it works now and in many cases it worked badly.
     One thing to add: I think there is a huge difference between groups that have been working smoothly for many years with many members, posts and a good owner team that suddenly go inactive, or groups that have never worked well at all. Maybe the longer the group exists and has functioned decently, the longer the owner should be given time to retake responsibility of his/her group.
     yahoo should also not look at the individual owner or moderator, but at the inactivity of a group or the group’s management all together. If 1 owner is inactive but everyone knows about this (in case of death or whatever reason) but the other owners/moderators wish to keep this person on the memberlist, the group still works well and has owners to take care of it, and no one reports problems, then there should be no need to worry.

161. Dan Surratt said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:34 pm

     A couple of the groups I participate in have missing owners (like a year or two of absence). There are also no moderators in those groups. So people are free to spam the group and in some cases an individual has completely disrupted the group – replying to every post with abusive responses and quite often profanity. It would be really great if some action were taken. I do have a few suggestions.

     Note: I also own a few groups and moderate several others.

     Absence – I’d say a full year before reassigning full ownership. Owners are free to take groups offline or delete them. So giving over ownership should be done only as a last resort.

     Add Moderator responsibilities – After a shorter period of time, say 90 days to 6 months. Change a Moderator’s access to allow more control – yet not make them a full owner. This way, if the owner just happens to go on an extended trip – they don’t lose their group.

     Add a active Moderator… if the group has no moderators (like some I visit), and the owner is gone 90 days. Allow someone to become a moderator – allowing them to control spam and ban members.

     Note: by changing moderator responsibilities or adding a moderator, this allows for a returning owner to demote or take away privileges if they show up before being gone the full year.

     How to select moderators? Primary considerations should be users that are actively participating in the group and are already owners or moderators of other groups.

     How to select owners? Only promote existing moderators who have been in the group a period of time (at least 6mo to 1 yr).

     Why all the resistance to promote people to owner right away? Well, as an owner I don’t want to lose my groups. If I take sabbatical to Europe for 3 months, I would be very upset to return and find my groups are no longer mine. I wouldn’t mine too much if the group was neglected and someone became a moderator in order to manage the group’s activities – but I would be very upset if I was no longer the owner.

162. Mark [Gatorbait1962] said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:35 pm

     Jami,
     I am the owner of one group, and a moderator with owner privileges of another group in which the owner went AWOL. I have not tried to create a new group since I can manage it fine as is.
     I was once a moderator on a couple other groups, and left because I did not have full privileges, and the AWOL owner stopped replying to e-mails. Here is how I feel on the issue: Sometimes, and owner may not have a reason to log in, but that could be a red flag for Yahoo to check into. If the owner has recent posts, he/she is still there. Members of abandoned groups should have a way to report them to Yahoo for the situation to be checked out.
     If the owner of an abandoned group does not respond to e-mail in 30 days, maybe Yahoo could have a way set up to call the person. If that does not correct the situation, unless the owner had a chosen successor, Yahoo should then appoint their own temporary owner to oversee the group choosing a new owner.

163. Shawn said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:39 pm

     What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?

     No less than 6 months! There are circumstances where 30 days is just too short. Accidents, extended illness, etc. In addition to this have an expedited process in the event it can be established and confirmed that the owner is deceased.

     Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?

     Promoting an existing moderator would provide continuity. I don’t think it is practical to have this person named at the start of the group. Even in the case where the person was named at the start, by the time this option may need to be exercised that person may be inactive as well.

     What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?

     In the event there is no active moderator Yahoo should ask for a volunteer and base the selection on a combination of seniority, activity and appropriateness of posting history.

     What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?

     Simple. Ownership should always go back to the original owner.

     What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.

     This needs to be done very carefully. I have moderated groups for several years, and had a problem once with a clique within a group trying to take over the group. This got to the point that some of the people figured out who I was and started calling me at work demanding I assign a new owner because they didn’t like my style of moderation.

     It is important that this policy be setup as to not be able to be manipulated or misused in a situation like this for an unhappy minority to steal control from a legitimate owner. This is a big part of my reasoning for a period of 6 months to a year.

164. Harry said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:40 pm

     I think the replacement of an owner has to be as objective a process – from Yahoo’s standpoint – as possible. I don’t know how many there are, but if there are a significant number of groups with MIA owners, there’s no way Yahoo’s people can/should a lot of time or resources in “vetting” for a new owner for a group about which they know nothing.

     I echo the suggestion that there be a simple “Owner MIA” link on a group’s website, perhaps similar to the “Send reactivation request” for bouncing members, where a member can notify Yahoo that the owner appears to be missing. Maybe requiring a brief narrative about why he/she is thought to be missing. Then either someone at Yahoo could attempt email contact, or it could be done automatically. If the owner receives the message, he/she could be given a link to confirm he’s still around, and/or else they’d have to go into the group and post a message or take some other action showing he/she is active.

     An obvious complication to that would be people harassing an active owner; there’d have to be some method of preventing that kind of abuse. Maybe the “MIA” link could automatically disappear for, say 90 days, every time the owner takes some action, such as logging in, appoving/denying a membership or a post, etc.

     As far as time frames and replacement owners, that’s tougher. I’m on a group with dozens of posts daily, and a MIA owner/moderator could be a problem within a couple weeks. OTOH, I’ve got two small “family” groups that usually get a post or two a month at most. My thought is that message volume should somehow be weighted more heavily than a one-size-fits-all “X” number of weeks.

     For selecting a successor owner, my first choice would be an existing moderator (who was by definition appointed by the owner to begin with), after sufficient time has passed with no response from the original owner. If there’s only one moderator, give it to that person if they’re interested. Otherwise, open a poll for the members to vote on one of the several moderators if there are several. If there are no moderators, or none interested in owning, then I dunno.

165. Barb said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:43 pm

     My initial response to this was to allow a year at least, but after reading the responses and realizing how fast spammers move in and wreck a group, I believe it should be way shorter.

     How long do utility companies allow you to be absent from pay? In the hospital or incapacitated can be justified for only so long. I say a shorter period of time is needed because of spammers and squatters moving in. Frankly, if a group is fairly inactive, what’s to save?

     I am a moderator of a group that the owner is absent. I know he’s okay, but he’s just not interested. I do everything the group needs. I don’t think he’ll give up the group, however. It’s an ownership thing. (c:

     If an owner is able and wants to return, great, if the current owner wants to give it up or be co-owner. Most former owners will do that just to see if they can anyway. Ownership is a tricky subject. Oh, the power! LOL If Yahoo took the group and offered it to me, I would take it willingly. I do everything anyway.

     I agree with the guy that said, “You snooze, you lose!” If it saves the group that the members obviously care about, then it’s the right thing. From start (initial inquiry) to finish (2nd notice and switchover) it should only be 90 days. There is no room for a lot of empathy when it comes to business. If the owner can’t or won’t run the group, they should bow out or be ousted.

166. Brady said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:46 pm

     I say 30 days. If an owner doesn’t use a moderator, knowing he/she will be gone for more than 30 days, then that’s a fair amount of time to promote one.

167. Desmond said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:47 pm

     I am a victim of an abandoned owner. I’m President of a running club and we have a very active group on yahoo. The group was formed and owned by a prior member who is no longer a member of the club and whose email no longer works.

     Even HE (and he is very willing) is no longer able to re-assign the ownership of the group since his old email is no longer valid.

     It amazes me that Yahoo would let a group that posts 200 emails a month languish without an owner for 8 years and say they can’t do anything about it. It’s about time they allow someone (such as a long time moderator) to be promoted to owner and REMOVE the dead link to an owner whose email has not existed for over 7 years.

     Can’t wait for ANY means of transferring ownership to be created….

168. EMan said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:47 pm

     Thanks for addressing this! Several cases and situations can lead to this, such as owners dying, going on deployment, and others whose single owner email address bounces. Owner’s address evaporate with ISP migration else get changed with a new server domain and there was no way to go back in and change ownership.

     Some groups are long standing and occupy a desirable spot owing to its name that serves or would serve a broad body of members. e.g Meteor Shower–a group that posted astronomical events a week ahead of the event.

     The guideline should have a provision for other than abandonment such that a bona fide owner whose email address no longer exists can be reinstated by Yahoo. Inc. For example Yahoo accidentally killed my email address rather than the spammer I reported and 3 groups I had set up– but not opened recruitment for, vanished because, I- the owner no longer had that yahoo account. I know another case where the owner lost his University address (which he unwisely opened the group under ) could rejoin his group as a regular member but couldn’t resume owner duties.

     That said, I propose a trustee system composed of existing owners/moderator volunteers who would take over the day to day running, recruit new owners, evaluate the group’s existing statement of purpose and make recommendations to a Yahoo inc. body such as this for disposition. Duties would typically include:

     1. Analyze groups under a simple criteria to see if it needs to be abolished or maintained and make recommendations to a Yahoo master moderator. (e.g. “Boise U GMAT study group” that was organized in the Spring of 2006. Has 4 out of 6 members bouncing, no traffic in three years other than freebies.com, etc.)

     2. Trustees could assume/be assigned orphans for a fixed period(e.g 60 days) while a new moderator/owner is recruited. Make pollls /announcements to the membership, limit /remove spammers to reclaim the groups already in disarray.

     3. Review members interested in assuming ownership who could apply/petition the master moderator( or whatever name or admin group so designated for ownership submitting the reasons for asking and would be given the group for a “probationary period” before ownership was made permanent.

     It would seem that some universal member such as “GroupBuddy” be a default moderator for each new group and the creater/owner would have an option to include as a safety for technical issues to approve replacement moderators whilst technical issues or the afore mentioned circumstances were resolved. This would be implementable with no or minor programing

     The devil is in the details but a framework such as above needs to be in place so that Yahoo, Inc can make policy decisions on how to transfer ownership.

169. Sam said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:48 pm

     Instead of chasing groupowners away, I would start making efforts to keep groupowners with Yahoogroups.

170. phil said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:48 pm

     The primary criteria should be that Yahoo should not have to make subjective decisions unless there is no other option. The easiest way for this to be achieved is that all owners need to appont at least one moderator. Then see below.

     A moderator with full priviledges can do everything that an owner can do. So there is no need to create new co-owners etc. This should bypass issues with owners returning.

     If the owner is active but has his ID disabled for whatever reason, then there needs to be a process for the owner proving who he/she is and then Yahoo reinstating his priviledges under a new ID.

     The first step should be that members should take the initiative and try to contact the owner. If this fails then they should hold a poll after at least one month of trying. The question should include the time period that members have been trying to contact the owner and that members are asked to authorise Yahoo to upgrade the existing moderators priviledges. These moderators were appointed by the owner so these should be the people who the owner had confidence in. If the owner returns, he can downgrade these priviledges as he/she desires. If the group settings do not allow polls then there needs to be a process where a member can contact Yahoo, state the facts, and then Yahoo create the poll.

     If there are no existing/active moderators, then after 3 months (more time needs to be given as the owner will not be selcting the new 2IC) there should be a poll to appoint a new moderator. The risk on this is that the group has been hijacked by spammers etc and these people will dominate the vote. So this should be the only point where Yahoo has discretion. Within 1 week of the closing of the poll, if a member(s) can provide historical proof based on posts that there is a more appropriate person who should be the moderator, then this person should be appointed rather than the poll winner.

     First there should be a group poll. Let the members vote on who they want. If the group is overun with spam etc so it is basically inactive, then

171. vickie said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:51 pm

     This is a great subject and one that really needs to be addressed.

     I had this problem a couple of years ago. A group that I was a moderator for had the owner basically disappear. I could do approvals but could not assign another moderator or get any help. I tried for over 6 months to find the owner but could not. To make a long story short, I went to the company of the product we were a group for and they were able to help me find her and she gave me ownership. The other choice is we would have abandoned the group and started a new one.

     I worry about yahoo having the time to deal with all of this nonsense so I do not think yahoo should actively monitor who is an active group leader or not.

     I think all groups should be required to have at least one moderator or even one co-owner. Then If the moderator comes to yahoo and says that the group owner has abandoned them, then maybe have the moderator made a co-owner depending on the time element.

     I think 1 month is an adequate amount of time if there is only one owner and no moderators. If there are moderators then 6 months of bouncing email or unresponsiveness is plenty of time to allow before moving a moderator up to a owner.

     It can be a difficult job finding a moderator that is willing to do the job right and help maintain the “flavor” of a group. I would not want to be the yahoo person who had to “pick” a new owner for a ownerless group, based on limited time and knowledge.

     To help prevent this from happening to this particular group in the future I have made both of my moderators into owners. With other groups that I “own” that are for clubs/organizations I have made sure that someone else has my login and password or are co-owners.

     Yahoo groups are a very important form of communication for many different organizations and I think the management should be formalized a bit more.

172. Leonard said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:52 pm

     I guess 30 days is a good time frame to consider that the owner is absent.

     There should be a possibility for the owner to choose a trustee in the event of creation of the group and if no trustee is named a moderator should be upgraded by running a pool in the group.

     If the owner does show up later, he definately should be able to re-gain his privileges.

173. Jennifer said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:55 pm

     I am a group owner. I took over from an inactive owner. but I do go away from my computer for 8 weeks at a time. I have a moderator who can approve things and deal with spam at that time. I think the time frame should be pretty long. Groups dealing with health issues are often run by people with health issues who may not always be available. and maybe all of this should only apply to groups with a certain amount of memebers. If I set up a group of me and my 2 sisters and it went inactive no big deal(except maybe to your server space).

174. Larry W. Virden said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:56 pm

     I really applaud Yahoo for dealing with this issue. I’ve been trying to deal with a group in which I was involved but in which the moderator has disappeared from for years.

     > What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?

     If the group is unmoderated, then probably 3 months. If the group is moderated and there are some moderators active, 6 months. If the group is moderated with only one moderator – certainly not more than 3 months.

     > Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?

     Since a moderator/owner could be missing because they no longer have the means to be on the internet (death, debts, incapacity, etc.) I think that promotion seems reasonable. However, the process should be “notify the owner they have NNN days to speak up. After that, the nominee should be contacted and told they have NNN days to agree to be the new owner. If they do not respond or do not wish to be the new owner, then on down the list. If no one is willing to own the group, then perhaps the group is turned off.

     > What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?

     1. one of the existing moderators
     2. most active contributor
     3. disable the group.

     >What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?

     They certainly should not be banned from the group. Once another owner has been identified, the original owner should work out what happens next with the new person. If no agreement can be reached, then perhaps the original owner might be given a copy of the original messages and allowed to go off and do their own thing elsewhere.

     > What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.
     Once a new owner/moderator has been identified, it should be required that one or two additional people be identified so the same problem doesn’t repeat.

175. Renee said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 6:58 pm

     I am a moderator of a group whose owner has been AWOL for several years. The group had become overrun by spam and the members were fast becoming disgruntled. After many attempts and finally reaching his wife on the telephone, I managed to get a hold of the owner a few years ago and asked to be made a moderator. He said he had no problem with that but then I found out that he didn’t grant me any power. Then he became completely unreachable. I finally took my situation to Yahoogroups, and I was given more power as a moderator. I can now approve memberships and perform other moderator duties. I think it’s high time that I was made the owner of this group given that I have been taking care of it for at least 2-3 years now while the owner is nowhere to be found.

     To answer your question, I would say a year is a fair amount of time to give an owner who has gone missing to reappear. Emails should be sent out on a yearly basis requiring owners to respond to keep their ownership status of the group. If they don’t reply within a specified amount of time, the group can be passed along to someone else. I think ownership should be given to one of the moderators. The moderator that has been a member of the group the longest would get it. That moderator would also have to be an active member of the group, or at least have been performing moderator duties on a regular basis.

     I like the idea of making a co-owner out of a moderator when an owner has gone AWOL. You don’t have to take the original owner’s ownership away to do that.

     It would be extremely difficult to move all the members over to a new group in my case because this is an alumni group and if there are too many groups with that title people would join the AWOL one not realizing that the “real” one is the new one. I have seen people open up new groups on the same topic and all it does is dilute the membership of both old and new groups and neither one gets off the ground as a result. In the case of an alumni group it’s best if there is only one group identified with that school or class year or else it creates confusion.

176. Kelley said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:00 pm

     If a group owner disappears for an extended period of time and then re-appears only after Yahoo has taken steps to transfer ownership, I think it would be in the best interest of the group, and new owner, that the absentee owner be a member, only. I think the “co-owner” solution would be problematic if an original owner comes back with a chip upon the shoulder. It could be detrimental to the group. The original owner could spitefully just delete the group or cause such hurt feelings that members leave in droves.

     If the original owner is set to “member” instead of “co-owner,” then the new owner would have some control in the event of a negative reaction from the original owner. If, at some time the new owner wants to relinquish ownership back to the original, or they agree to share, then that should be worked out between the two individuals.

     Answers specific to your feedback questions:

     * What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?

     A quarter of a year is more than reasonable time for an owner to disappear. If after three months and attempted contact by members and Yahoo, solicits no response, it would be reasonable to transfer ownership. Some people may be gone this long due to illness, etc., but a responsible owner would have notified the group or had someone notify the group of an extended leave of absence. This would be an even more tolerable situation if the owner also designated one or more individuals as moderators during the absence. However, for an owner to just vanish, 3 months is more than a reasonable period of time for the group to flounder before new leadership is set in place.

     * Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?

     I think a faithful moderator is a reasonable choice. If an owner has irresponsibly vanished, why should they have any voice in the selection of a predecessor? Another option would be to query the membership for volunteers, including any existing moderators, and then put it to a group vote.

     * What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?

     I reiterate, query the group for volunteers and then put it to a membership vote.

     * What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?

     It is because of the possibility of a reappearance that I think the new owner should be set as Owner and NOT Co-owner. Again, the original owner may not have given one iota for the group as long as he or she was in charge, even if completely absent. However, just like a child who couldn’t care less about a toy until another child comes along to play with it, the original owner could come back with a vengence and if the original owner has co-owner status, all havoc could erupt with no over-riding controls available for the Yahoo promoted new owner. I think co-owner status is not the best solution for Yahooo Groups and group members.

     * What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.

     I have been in groups where the owner literally leaves the group without giving over ownership or even moderation to another member. Very frustrating.

     I have also been in a group where the owner disappeared forever. One day, well over a year ago, she asked if anyone in the group would like to take over as owner. I volunteered and she agreed and said she would make the switch. Our entire group is still waiting for her to make this switch, well over a year later. She just disappeared and never relinquished ownership. I finally gave up and started a mirror group and posted notice in the original group for anyone interested in joining a more active group under the same topic.

177. GregYFD said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:00 pm

     Q: What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?

     >>> If a member of an existing group reports that a group owner appears to be absent, Yahoo should check the owner’s account to see if he/she has been active. If the owner has been inactive for six months or more, and/or has a bouncing email address, Yahoo shall send an email to the owner and a copy to the group’s mail list requesting that the owner contact Yahoo within 30 days. If Yahoo receives no response from the owner after thirty days from sending the notice, Yahoo should take action.

     Q: Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?

     >>> If Yahoo must appoint a new co-owner, first choice should be an existing moderator. If there is more than one moderator, moderators should be asked if they would be willing to take ownership of the group. If more than one moderator is willing to take co-ownership of the group, either make all co-owners, or have the current active membership of the group elect the new co-owner via a poll.

     Establish the position of Senior Moderator, which would be appointed by the owner as the first choice replacement for owner should the situation arise. This would allow an owner to name a replacement without appointing a co-owner.

     Q: What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?

     >>> Announce to the group that the owner is absent, and that any member interested in being appointed co-owner to respond to Yahoo. After 30 days, have the current members of the group elect a new co-owner via a poll.

     Q: What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?

     >>> When a new co-owner is appointed by Yahoo, that co-owner shall not be able to delete the group for a period of one year. Should the original owner return within one year, the original owner shall regain control of the group, and the new co-owner shall be appointed Senior Moderator and will be first in line should the owner be absent again.

     Q: What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.

     >>> I believe that Yahoo should take action when notified by a group member that a group owner is inactive. I am not sure that Yahoo needs to police this automatically, but rather take action when a situation is reported to them.

178. Blain said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:03 pm

     After reading a number of these responses, I think folks need to keep in mind that Yahoo has finite staff that they can allocate to this problem. Any solution that involves human interaction measured in hours is too much — they need to be able to handle these things in minutes at the most. So reading over a list and finding out who is the most reasonable, or who is a bully is a non-starter. They don’t have time to deal with that.

     Next, please keep in mind that the existing system for allocating new moderators for abandoned groups isn’t a bad place to start. A user announces that they believe the group has been abandoned and solicits nominations for new moderator. After a reasonable nomination period, a poll is created that lists all the nominees. After a reasonable voting period, the poll is closed and the results forwarded to Yahoo, who designate the winner as a moderator.

     The shortcomings of this system is that it doesn’t convey ownership, just mod privileges, and it can’t be used for groups with the privacy privileges set certain ways. And a major shortcoming of this system is that (last time I checked) it isn’t mentioned anywhere in the help system at Yahoo, so very few people know about it.

     I think building on this system is a good idea, with some opportunities for automating the process. For instance:

     1. Having an address like -abandoned that users could write to to indicate that the group has been abandoned, which could trigger a process of checking to see if the group has actually been abandoned — perhaps with a minimum number of messages from different users over a period of time to really start the process.

     2. The process could include checking to see if the owner’s address is listed as bouncing, particularly hard-bouncing, or sending notice to the owner and/or mods that the group has been reported abandoned, to see if that message gets through or is responded to.

     3. If this automated review finds reason to believe the group is abandoned, a poll could be created with the question “Is this group abandoned?” which, if a majority indicate it has been, could bring an automated message indicating that nominations are open for a new mod/owner.

     4. -nominations could receive messages with YahooIDs or email addresses one-per-line that could be checked against the list users and, possibly, for minimum activity levels. Nominees could be automatically required to accept nomination through another automatic response.

     5. A new poll could be automatically created, listing the validated users nominated, and open for a reasonable period.

     6. When this period is up, the winner would be designated moderator/owner (a supermajority could be required to change owner, versus simple majority for moderator).

     This would require some coding, but not a lot of administrator time once implemented.

     The idea of a designated successor is also good.

179. Kelley said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:05 pm

     I keep getting an error message, but will try to get this posted….

     If a group owner disappears for an extended period of time and then re-appears only after Yahoo has taken steps to transfer ownership, I think it would be in the best interest of the group, and new owner, that the absentee owner be a member, only. I think the “co-owner” solution would be problematic if an original owner comes back with a chip upon the shoulder. It could be detrimental to the group. The original owner could spitefully just delete the group or cause such hurt feelings that members leave in droves.

     If the original owner is set to “member” instead of “co-owner,” then the new owner would have some control in the event of a negative reaction from the original owner. If, at some time the new owner wants to relinquish ownership back to the original, or they agree to share, then that should be worked out between the two individuals.

     Answers specific to your feedback questions:

     * What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?

     A quarter of a year is more than reasonable time for an owner to disappear. If after three months and attempted contact by members and Yahoo, solicits no response, it would be reasonable to transfer ownership. Some people may be gone this long due to illness, etc., but a responsible owner would have notified the group or had someone notify the group of an extended leave of absence. This would be an even more tolerable situation if the owner also designated one or more individuals as moderators during the absence. However, for an owner to just vanish, 3 months is more than a reasonable period of time for the group to flounder before new leadership is set in place.

     * Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?

     I think a faithful moderator is a reasonable choice. If an owner has irresponsibly vanished, why should they have any voice in the selection of a predecessor? Another option would be to query the membership for volunteers, including any existing moderators, and then put it to a group vote.

     * What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?

     I reiterate, query the group for volunteers and then put it to a membership vote.

     * What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?

     It is because of the possibility of a reappearance that I think the new owner should be set as Owner and NOT Co-owner. Again, the original owner may not have given one iota for the group as long as he or she was in charge, even if completely absent. However, just like a child who couldn’t care less about a toy until another child comes along to play with it, the original owner could come back with a vengence and if the original owner has co-owner status, all havoc could erupt with no over-riding controls available for the Yahoo promoted new owner. I think co-owner status is not the best solution for Yahooo Groups and group members.

     * What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.

     I have been in groups where the owner literally leaves the group without giving over ownership or even moderation to another member. Very frustrating.

     I have also been in a group where the owner disappeared forever. One day, well over a year ago, she asked if anyone in the group would like to take over as owner. I volunteered and she agreed and said she would make the switch. Our entire group is still waiting for her to make this switch, well over a year later. She just disappeared and never relinquished ownership. I finally gave up and started a mirror group and posted notice in the original group for anyone interested in joining a more active group under the same topic.

180. Paul Troy said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:05 pm

     I’ve read many of the responses, and it doesn’t seem like a solution is as complicated as was mentioned in the original post – only the definition for “reasonable amount of time” seems to be in question. To me, there’s a difference between an AWOL owner and a disabled owner (for lack of a better term) – though both could be viewed as “absentee-ism”. So to counteract that, I think that whatever mechanism is put in place it should be tiered in some way to still allow a “disabled owner” to resume their responsibilities. Then again, if someone is so unable to resume as owner, then “getting back in the saddle” may not be a life priority at that time anyway. Even so, I think that some sort of appeal mechanism should be in place for those unique circumstances.

     As far as replacement, I think it needs to be put to the list membership to find a replacement – or two – from within the ranks. Otherwise, list disbandment may need to be a real option. If the membership is truly committed to the subject, they’ll find a new moderator, create a new list (with a new moderator, right?), or migrate to another similar group. If the notion of successor(s) is taken up (or more so, the extent where Facebook has officers for some of their groups), then maybe there should also be a check box if the moderator has discussed that with the successor or not. Such a check box may help Yahoo in gauging the commitment level of the successor(s).

     Anyway, there are some good ideas posted here and most seem to lean in the same direction. I read some of the stories above where owners died; I’d think that transitioning to a new owner would be be fast-tracked in some manner. My only fear is the possibility of list bullying where a faction petitions Yahoo to jettison an owner for allegedly being an AWOL owner, but the opposite is true. That’s where the fine line must be walked.

     Honestly, this started out as my $0.02, yet has likely grown to be about $0.05… So it goes….

181. Brenda said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:07 pm

     I’m curious about groups that are made for specific purposes, for example, I also run a family group, and it has long periods of inactivity. But when there is a hurricane, or an illness, it gets busy for awhile and then has inactivity again.

     I also am the owner of a couple of 2-member groups, where I and another poster choose to communicate and archive our postings there. Sometimes they also have long periods of inactivity, and right now in one of them, the other poster has no Internet so it’s been quiet for some time.

     And I closed to membership, another group, that is simply sitting out there on the Internet, clearing out all the members. I archived it in Word, but have been slowly checking those archives to be sure I got it all, so I have not yet deleted it.

     So in regard to the above, I’m assuming I would get notice that “Yahoo” feels my groups described above are abandoned, and would get the right to respond to their notices to me as the owner. Would that be enough, that I responded, to keep those groups open?

     I also think it’s a great idea to come up with a way to help members reclaim their leaderless groups. I’m glad to see something being done about it!

     Brenda

182. Donald H. said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:07 pm

     I think the general idea is a good one. I’m not sure the best way to implement it, though.

     I would think that if the owner is absent and is allowing the group to be a SPAM magnet, or has passed away, something needs to be done.

     Not all moderators participate or care about the group as much as some members do, so automatically picking a moderator to take over might not always be a good idea. In our groups, it would work out well. In some others I’ve seen, the mods seem to be absent a lot of the time.

     Some hybrid arrangement might work out best for replacing an owner when that is needed. You can get a good idea of how much a member or moderator cares about the group by his or her posts and if a moderator, do they actually do any moderating (approving new members, moderating new members’ posts, etc.)?

     Even if a member is not a moderator in the group with the absentee owner, if he or she is a good moderator in another group, that person might be a better choice than one of the current moderators.

     No matter what course Yahoo takes to address this, they won’t please everyone, some will feel things are unfair, etc.

     Donald

183. Frank Nosalek said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:08 pm

     I am currently a moderator of two groups where the owners have disappeared. I would like to see a process where, after it can be demonstrated that the owner e-mail addresses have gone inactive and that the owner has abandoned the list, one or more moderators can be promoted to owner or co-owner status. In the event where an owner has disappeared for several years, such as one of my lists, I’d like to see full ownership passed to a responsible moderator. This really needs to be done because, in one of my groups, my list is for a world-wide software user group.

184. Christopher Erickson said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:09 pm

     Automating the process.

     I can appreciate that Yahoo is going to want as automated and fair of a system as is possible. To that end, I would suggest that any existing group member can click a link on a group’s home page that can launch the ORP (Owner Replacement Process). When an ORP is launched, the Group owners, moderators and members are notified of the ORP and who launched it. The existing group owner(s) will have 30 days to respond to automated inquiries via email and owner specific links on the group’s home page. If they don’t respond within 30 days, a poll is automatically posted on the group and the existing members get to vote for who they want as a new group co-owner. After another 30 days, if the existing group owner(s) still have not responded to Yahoo’s automated inquiries, the poll is closed and the winning group member is promoted to group co-owner. The ORP takes 60 days total and if the existing owner(s) respond at any time, the ORP is cancelled. Otherwise the new group co-owner can then establish other co-owners, moderators and modify moderator delegated authorities. They will not be allowed to delete the old group owner or modify their group membership. During the ORP, there will be an additional home page link present that would allow group members to report any ORP abuse attempts. During the ORP voting poll time period, all members will be promoted to unmoderated message status so all members will be able to discuss the situation and make suggestions for who the new co-owner should be or to campaign to become the new group co-owner.

     This approach should minimize the Yahoo support burden as well as create as fair of a system for assigning a new group co-owner as might be possible.

     -Christopher Erickson, owner/moderator of 20 Yahoo groups.

185. Jabriol said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:12 pm

     Make it simple. There is a group I was trying to acquire because I was a member of it. TVG it is called. dead in the water. I can get it running, but there is too much red tape.

186. Shonda said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:13 pm

     I am a group owner and i admit that i’ve been absent due to some personal things in my life and i havent been able to get access to the internet but i always answer my emails if i know who and where it its coming from, but assigning someone to monitor the group in my absent sounds good to me.

187. Tyger said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:22 pm

     I have a good amount of groups I own and moderate. I’m also on several that have been over taken by spam because the owner walked away with open membership or put the group on moderate and nothing goes out at all.

     I think the guidelines you are looking at are very good

     * What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?

     I think that a 14-21 day response time from the previous owner is more than fair for them to respond. If the email bounces then that should be pretty much it

     * Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?

     I think if someone steps up to take over an abandoned group that’s great. If the owner can’t be contacts I think it should go to who ever steps up

     * What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?

     Well make the one that steps up a probationary owner. If the previous owner does not step up within 90 days then the full ownership goes to the one who stepped up

     * What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?

     Bascially….if they don’t respond in 14-21 days and a probationary owner goes into place and at the end of that them the person that stepped up should be able to take full ownership

     * What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.

     I def think something needs to be done. I am on some great groups that I don’t want to see the membership lost from, but something needs to be done especially when they are over run with spam.

188. Ami said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:22 pm

     I was the moderator of a group that the owner didn’t respond.
     I didn’t have permission to delete SPAM or unwanted messages or members.
     I ended up abandoning the group, from time to time I check on it and now it’s just full of nothing but garbage.
     I think Yahoo should be able to sent a message to a group that it’s inactive and after some time delete the group, rather than allowing it to be a place of undesired messages, just GARBAGE, nothing to do with the “original” purpose of the group.
     I think if a group owner just abandoned a group and there are enough members still working on the group, then if there is a Moderator, he/she should be able to assume ownership without waiting too much time.
     I think Moderators should be able to notify Yahoo of the situation, rather than waiting for some time to make the change.
     I also think that every so often, maybe 6 weeks, if a group doesn’t have any activity Yahoo should send a “warning” to the entire group so someone is aware of the group activity or lack of it, and if none respond, then DELETE the group.

189. Andy said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:24 pm

     1. Time frame before triggering a change: I think it should be a range, not a single time. Perhaps minimum 30 days, maximum 6 months. Do not automatically trigger a group ownership change just because no moderator action happened in 30 days; if the group has low activity, or the owner is out sick or with a broken computer for a few weeks.

     Some groups might require action even sooner, say if they are “under attack” and the owner is missing, or for very active groups. In such cases, perhaps Yahoo! should appoint a temporary owner or moderator, to be reviewed if the original owner returns within (say) 6 months.

     Situations such as verified death of the owner should allow an immediate change.

     The clock starts ticking the last time the old owner posts a message or does any kind of moderator action.

     2. Yahoo! must have the ability to promote anyone (if necessary, not just a moderator!) to owner, in case the original owner named no successor (as is the case with all groups today) or if his/her named successor is also AWOL. If the original owner did name a successor who can be reached and wants to manage the group, start with that. Otherwise, Yahoo chooses.

     Choosing a successor when you start a group, sounds nice, but I think the likelihood of this working is small, because the successor is just as likely to have gone missing as is the owner.

     3. Other criteria for choosing new Owner:

     Current Moderators (if any) of the group are preferred. If none, Moderators or Owners of other groups are preferred. Long-term members of a group are preferred over newer group members.

     Current group members could help choose their new member (via a Poll).

     4. If the Owner returns within (say) 6 months, and wishes to regain control, I think Yahoo! should intervene and moderate am offline discussion amongst the key players to decide on what to do.

     Yahoo!Group policy should state that Owners who disappear for extended periods could lose rights to their groups.

     5. Other concerns:

     Yahoo!-appointed Owners or Moderators must be given sufficient privileges to successfully manage the group. (I am a member of a group where this isn’t true – where the owner lacks privileges and is essentially powerless.)

     I think in the majority of cases a change-of-ownership wouldn’t be abused. However, Yahoo should be prepared to intervene if a conflict arises.

190. Albert Feyen said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:25 pm

     I’d suggest after ninety to one hundred twenty days of owner inactivity someone should enter the group and find an existing member who would like to take it over. Some groups need someone who is passionate about the subject around which the group was formed.

191. CindyK said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:28 pm

     Some great and well thought out comments above. I own 3 closed groups all less than 100 members. All of my groups could easily be recreated by one or more members. I do however think it would be a good idea to have the annual option of adding a co-owner. I’ve thought for awhile that I should do this but I never get around to making it happen.

     * Specified time frame: 60-90 days after last unexplained activity, at the request of members.

     * New owner: Should be a co-owner or moderator already in existence. If neither exists perhaps it is time to create a new group with a restructed statement of purpose and leadership.

     * Criteria for new owner: I understand that there my be huge long standing groups but if the owner is not there and has not taken the initiative to create a co-owner or moderator it seems like someone who is interested should take the initiative to restructure a new group.

     * If the original owner should reappear they would have to state their case to be reinstalled as a co-owner. Otherwise they would be a member only.

     * Other concerns-Does the list belong to the owner or to the group at large? I’m just not sure someone else should take over if no one was appointed by the original owner.

192. Vic said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:32 pm

     I guess it boils down to:

     1. Owner not interested
     2. Owner not alive
     3. Owner busy or unavoidably detained

     The path spelled out so far only deals with the first instance.

     Something is needed for situations where group members know perfectly well that the owner is deceased, and even group moderators may exist but be unable to take ownership. This actually happened to one of my groups, and we had to migrate, a process from which we never recovered.

     There are several times when group owners may be unable to act for reasons beyond their control. This may be an extended vacation, or local government restrictions, or simply machine breakdowns that end up with lost passwords and so on. A good process will allow action through, perhaps, a default Yahoo! backoffice email address to which notifications can be sent, to prevent group closure or appointment of new owners.

193. Valerie Chau said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:34 pm

     I have found several abandoned groups that have been taken over by slandering trolls…here is one: christianconservatives. There is no owner and the group is freely entered and exited. But if you join there you can read the most disgusting XXXX rated posts and slanders against people who are not in that group and never were. It appears to be a dumping place for dishonest mentally ill people.I would say SHUT DOWN all groups where there is no owner and the no moderators with the ability to keep a group clean.

     Another problem I am haiving as a moderator is that there is a member of a group who has spoofed several members’ email addresses and used them to post really racist and homophobic comments. I have contacted all the real members involved and they are sure they DID NOT send those posts. IP address tracks all of the spoof emails to a server in Scottsdale, AZ. How can I, a moderator find and removed a member who posts from this server in a group with 1900 members?

194. Valerie Chau said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:35 pm

     I have found several abandoned groups that have been taken over by slandering trolls…here is one: christianconservatives. There is no owner and the group is freely entered and exited. But if you join there you can read the most disgusting XXXX rated posts and slanders against people who are not in that group and never were. It appears to be a dumping place for dishonest mentally ill people.I would say SHUT DOWN all groups where there is no owner and the no moderators with the ability to keep a group clean.

     Another problem I am having as a moderator is that there is a member of a group who has spoofed several members’ email addresses and used them to post really racist and homophobic comments. I have contacted all the real members involved and they are sure they DID NOT send those posts. IP address tracks all of the spoof emails to a server in Scottsdale, AZ. How can I, a moderator find and removed a member who posts from this server in a group with 1900 members?

195. Alan J said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:36 pm

     I’m ready to see anything done that will provide a means to transfer ownership to an existing moderator when the owner’s Yahoo ID and e-mail have gone defunct. I originated a Y-group for our neighborhood association board. When I moved on, I promoted the new president to owner. Now he’s moved on and I’m a non-owning moderator. He can’t promote me because his Yahoo ID and e-mail are defunct, and he therefore cannot access the group, nor can he even verify his status with a Yahoo customer support rep because he can’t verify that old e-mail address. Yahoo customer support told me about all I could do was to abandon the group and start a new group. What a thing to have to do… abandon our message archives and have to move all our files just to have a moderator with owner privileges. Yahoo could easily verify my bona fides as a responsible group owner and check the message archives to see the owner history.

     Summary: Do something, even if its wrong.

196. Ralph Baker said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:37 pm

     Hello to Jami, Kirstie, Gordon and to all readers. Yes, I approve of Yahoo finally doing something to clean up so many spam-ridden groups that are taking up its bandwidth. The actions named herein are long overdue.

     #1: What should be the specified time frame that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted to owner or co-owner?
     *Reply…6 spam messages worth, that is time enough. Owner and moderator present or not, negligence is NEGLIGENCE!

     #2: Should Yahoo promote a moderator already in the group or should the currennt owner be required to name a successor who will take over in the event of owner/moderator inactivity?
     *Reply…the person so named as successor must have that status filed before the owner can assume full ownership privileges.

     #3: What other criteria should we use…..? Same as in #2 Reply.

     #4: What should happen if the original group owner reappears months or years later?
     *Reply: well, hmmm….this should have been worked out between the owner and successor soon after the group was started. My opinion is that if the owner is gone from duty for perhaps one month at most, then the successor should be able to assume full privileges at that time. He/she should give contact information to specific group members who can be trusted to keep the info confidential in case of emergencies.

     #5: What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting.

     *Reply: Gladly. The subject is MALICIOUS OWNERS and their equally MALICIOUS MODERATORS!

     It is known that certain Yahoo! groups are owned and moderated by people whose disrespectful attitude toward innocent members renders the owners moderator worthy of immediate replacement by the innocent members who were/are kicked out of the group. It is further known that these innocent members served their groups very well, therefore…their membership should be restored by all means available to the overseers at Yahoo! Groups. The group message boards should be locked against all deletions/alterations until the restored member has had time to catch up on the accumulated messages posted since the kickout.

     I, Ralph a.k.a. , was so victimized without proper cause by the owners AND the moderators of TWO such groups. The truth is too long for this blog, but you’ll find it by contacting me sincerely at . My complaint involves the Yahoo ‘GoldsAndDings’ and the Yahoo ‘Dinopallies’.Thank you very much!

     Sincerely, Ralph Baker.

197. andrea robinson said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:41 pm

     I think that for all new groups, the owner should designate someone to take over in case he/she becomes inactive. For existing groups, there should be a way for a group member to report an absentee owner. It should not be hard for Yahoo to check and verify that the group owner is not responding to posts or emails from the membership.

     However, these “solutions” also beg the following questions:
     What if the owner’s designee is also inactive or unresponsive?
     What period of absense is considered chronic? One year? Six months?
     Should Yahoo simply delete the group or presume to appoint somebody as new owner? If the group was deleted, anyone who wanted to restart it could do so.

     As long as these new rules are spelled out for new owners as they start groups, I’m okay with whatever consensus is reached. Thanks for attending to this problem.

198. Tricia D said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:45 pm

     The best option is if there is active moderators in place, they should be promoted to owners.

     I sit on a Jeep group where the owner has been gone for several years and there are no moderators. I say if the owner is gone .. then a new owner should be chosen. Have something where members can volunteer to take over ownership and then allow the other members to chose an owner out of the volunteers.

     I do not feel having new owners name a successor at the start of the group would work as many start new groups without any other members. I think it should be common knowledge that whoever they have chosen as a moderator would someday be the successor if the need arises. Maybe again set that within 3 months of opening the group, all owners either need a co-owner or moderator to continue the group.

     There should be a time frame to allow the owner to show back up, 3 or 4 months. Over that and you start to end up with much spam on the group, or lose good members due to lack of moderation.

     If after the time frame the owner then decides to show back up, they will need to rejoin the group as a regular member. It is unfair for him/her to just leave the members to begin with, so why worry if they decide to show up months later. Could you image what a company would be like if the owner just up and left for three months without anyone to “fill their shoes”? There would be no company within a month!

     Also I feel if a yahoo person does open group(s), then disappears to the point yahoo has to find a new owner, that person should be blocked from starting new groups.

199. Charlotte said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:48 pm

     I am an owner of a small private group. I am a moderator of a larger open group and I belong to several others. I have quit several groups because the owner never responded to my complaints of spam. Had there been a process available to take over the group and rid it of the robospam I would have done so.

     I think if the owner does not respond, there should be a process in place so any person who shows interest can become a co-owner. The original owner can still be free to come back, but should have only a limited amount of privileges, i.e. cannot delete posts, cannot delete the group. I once belonged to a group that was deleted with no warning, by an owner who had not posted in over a year, and had not anwered anyone’s emails. We scrambled to build another group, but there were some very bruised feelings.

     There should be a way to notify YahooGroups when an owner has not responded in a reasonable time frame and someone wants to petition for ownership. A YahooGroups announcement should go out to all groups notifying all members of any onwership changes.

200. shanna said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:49 pm

     i noticed when a group has been inactve for a while the porno guys seem to take it over

201. Randi said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:50 pm

     I hope you find these ideas helpful.

     After a situation in my life took me away from my group for about a year, I did assign a co-owner in the event something does ever happen to me. I never intended, nor did I ever abandon my group in that year I was gone. I did however have moderators that were able to fill my absense gap. I was fortunate as the group was able to keep running as I have heavy moderation set up in order to join to avoid spammers and trouble makers. I do feel it is important to have a co-owner, however to assign a co-owner when creating a group is not very sensible in my opinion nor stable in the long run because finding a TRUSTED co-owner or even a moderator for that matter is not very easy. I have gone through numerous moderators before I was ever able to find stable and reliable ones. My current moderation group has now been with me for a few years now. And with a trusted co-owner.
     To assign a group member randomly could be asking for trouble with the group. Instead, Yahoo should give the originating group owner up to 6 mos to a year to assign a list of succeeding group owners should the original owner stop activity or abandon the group. If the owner has no activity before that amount of time, it was more likely destined to be another dead or spam filled group. This will not only give a group owner back up, but encourage a new owner to quickly start group activity.

     As for a time span. Anywhere from 90 to 180 days (3 months to 6 months) with email requests sent weekly or monthly should suffice in my opinion.

     After 6 months of a group owner ceasing any activity, it should be considered abandonment. When the new owner takes over, the old owner should no longer be bale to claim it. Just my opinions.

     Good luck. And I look forward to alot of inactive, dead and spam filled groups getting deleted.

     Randi

202. John Johnson said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:51 pm

     I agree with some other posters. I run a few groups and one, the orginial owner first change her email and now is unavailable. It still works and used a lot but only as a moderator I can’t do some functions. the group is laamn

203. Charlotte said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:52 pm

     By the way, you would not want to appoint a predecessor, you would appoint a successor.

204. Katt said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:53 pm

     It might be possible that the group owner has already arranged for an extended leave and the group is aware of it, so if there are no complaints, there may be no need for any intervention by Yahoo administration. That said,

     1. 2-3 months with no interaction from the group owner would probably be long enough to wait. Complaints from members would certainly indicate that Yahoo admin may need to become involved. I am part of 2 groups that were never very active, and still isn’t, but we have few problems on the groups and there is no need for interference from Yahoo.

     2. If Yahoo admin feels that someone needs to be appointed from within the group, it might be a better choice to allow the group to make suggestions themselves, rather than Yahoo admin choosing someone. Yahoo admin would have no clue whether the person they chose might be someone the group would tolerate and could very well destroy an active group by a poor choice.

     On the other hand, this could be handled from the start on new groups by requiring all new groups to designate someone as a alternate authority at the time the group is opened, or within a specified time period after the group is opened. I’ve done this on my own group by asking another member to become co-owner so when I am ill and unable to function online, my group is covered.

     3. Possibly consider some type of poll by group members where they could nominate someone from within the group for co-owner status. Obviously, have a time frame within which such nominations must be made & send the poll notification to all members as a Special Notice. Then set up a final poll for group members to vote on those who have been nominated.

     4. If the original owner shows up again, I suppose they really should be allowed to retain co-owner status. After all, they did start the list.

     5. I think my biggest concern is Yahoo admin becoming too actively involved in running the groups. Helping a group with no active owner anymore is one thing. People die, they get hurt and are unable to function, they become ill and may need to live in a rehab center or stay at a hospital for extended periods of time when they never planned on this. Some method of helping groups that need this help is one thing, and probably a good thing. Especially if a group is actually asking for help. I am just concerned that Yahoo admin limit their activity within a group as Yahoo admin. If someone in Yahoo admin actually belongs to, and participates in, a group as a member, that’s a whole other ball game and doesn’t count as being Yahoo admin.

205. genine said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:58 pm

     I think its great if a moderator can be prooted by mia owners – I knw some owners decide to be gone for a few months etc but they make sure that people know
     I ‘moderate’ a group that the two owners have been MIA for almost 2 years – thats ridiculous!
     And I have left other groups I moderate because the owner was MIA and I was not allowed to function properly ie – not allowing copyright violations to be posted

206. coolp said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 7:59 pm

     I think you should be careful of taking groups from owners because things happen in life and people can lose their internet access and what not. However, I think promoting co-owners (with limitations) should be OK until the creator shows up and if they don’t show after like 6 months then take over the group. I think it’s important to allow adequate time for things to happen in an owner’s life. I think you can alter the rules to state that the owner forfeits their group if it goes unattended to more than six months. This sounds fair. No one can say it’s not enough time. If the group is inactive, I think deletion is ok since no one cared. The co-owners and should be chosen from the people in the group who care and are the most active. I think first choice should go to the current moderators if there are any.

207. pegkelley said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 8:17 pm

     Maybe every owner must designate a back-up owner when they start a group. Or later if the group already exists. That secondary “ownership” only kicks in when certain conditions are met (owner inactivity or lack of response to emails or something).

208. Dave said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 8:22 pm

     I think the time frame should be the same as Yahoo’s requirements for how long a regular email account goes inactive and is reclaimed by Yahoo. I’m not sure what that is, but I don’t think someone who has been gone from their own group for more than three months, certainly six, should expect that group to be his/hers when they get back.

209. Barbara D. said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 8:29 pm

     HI Jami,

     I’m so glad that the Yahoo Groups Community is considering this important issue. Just a small point. In your original message, in paragraph 8, I believe you intended to write “successor” rather than predecessor. An easy mistake to make.

     In planning for the time period, please allow at least 60 days for response in case the group owner may be away on an extended trip to Europe or something like that.

     During such interim, and *if* the group in question has at least one moderator, could you, as Yahoo administration, at least give a moderator two privileges: (a.) the privilege of changing the group to moderated, as a means to stop unwanted spam/ porn messages, and so on? I’m sure that otherwise it can be tremendously frustrating to be unable to stop such unwanted messages, and (b.) the privilege to approve new subscribers, if such privileges had not already been given.

     Thanks for your consideration.

210. Tom said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 8:33 pm

     Glad to see Yahoo is starting to address this rather large and growing problem. It’s not clear whether you are seeking a purely automatic method to maintain active group ownership or can also support some degree of manual intervention. I daresay that some manual means will be needed to resolve many situations, e.g., absence of any moderators to promote.

     “What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?”

     The time frame from last recorded owner action to the initiation of owner succession should be inversely proportional to the level of activity in the group, between 30 days for active ones and 6 months for quiet ones. I don’t think that a tickle every six monthe to the owner of a dead group is any aggravation – it’s a motivation to stimulate the group, renew ownership or to delete the group. Even 30 days with no owner activity could be highly disruptive if there are no active moderators.

     “Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?”

     Yes, yes and no. On detection of abandonment, the notice to the Owner should give him/her the opportunity to name a new Owner. Failure to respond should result in Yahoo! taking steps to name a new Owner.

     Naming a successor on the founding of a group is too early to be mandatory but an automated reminder process whose frequency is proportional to group activity should be sent to Owners of groups lacking a co-owner or successor.

     The longest serving recently active Moderator should be offered the ownership and work your way down the list if he/she declines. The new owner will start getting the notices to appoint a co-owner…

     “What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?”

     This is probably the most difficult measure to automate and the most contentious one to execute. I think an election by the membership would allow Yahoo to not have to exercise the wisdom of Solomon and could be automated. Freeze the membership list until a new Owner has been elected and set Posting Options to Members post, Reply-To All Members, Unmoderated, Attachments Excluded, Spam Filtering On, Archive access – Members. Send a General Notice to all members to inform them of the process of candidacy and election. Provide a link for members to submit their names to stand and a short message describing their goals, experience, etc. Use some variant of the Poll as the ballot box (one vote per member) – it would be nice to tie the candidacy message to this form for convenience and the list of candidates and their messages should go out in the General Notice announcing the Poll. First past the post on closing the Poll is the new owner and is required to nominate a co-owner or successor; if a tie, then they are co-owners. As for the durations, it will have taken some time to reach this point (detection plus confirmation of abandonment) and I don’t think there is any justification for a lengthy election process – I would suggest 7-10 days for the nomination period after the General Notice and likewise for the Poll, assuming more than one person stands for election. If only one stands then he/she is immediately acclaimed with no Poll. If nobody stands, then a second General Notice extending the nomination period with a warning that the group will be deleted if nobody stands for election.

     “What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?”

     Yahoo! should issue to all Owners the change in its Terms and Conditions for group owners and that an owner who has been perceived to have abandoned the exercise of owner responsibilities will be demoted to Member only status.

     “What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here?”

     Perhaps the term ‘Owner’ needs to be changed to something like ‘Chair’ or ‘Manager’ or ‘CEO’ or ‘Chief Steward’. I’ve always felt uncomfortable with it – I suspect it is derived from List-Owner which is more acceptable because it narrows the meaning to one tangible – I don’t own the content.

     I don’t know if you have to create a new membership category or property of “Heir” or “Successor” – isn’t the designation of co-owner sufficient?

     If it is going to take a long time to automate the replacement process, in the interim introduce a manual process to start addressing the loudest squeaking wheels.

     Go for it!

211. Donna McLellan said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 8:34 pm

     Good everning!
     I am so glad that this issue is being addressed!
     I am owner of one sleep disorders group and
     moderate that one, plus 2 more groups. One of the groups the owner is MIA, and has been for well over 2 years. We really do not even know what her name is any more!
     I feel the owner should be notified that they are in danger of losing the group. If there is no reply, then someone else should be appointed within 30 days. I think yahoo should ask for volunteers, but a volunteer cannot be someone who has just joined the group, of course.
     I don;t care if the owner shows up a month or a year later, they can rejoin the group as a regular member, but no moderating privileges.
     If they abandon the group, they lose their rights.
     I also would like to address the matter of bouncing members. If there have been 3 reactivation requests from the owner, and the member is still bouncing, they should be removed by the owner. I am talking about somone who has been bouncing for 6 months or more. There could be problems that we do not know about. But, this is becoming a huge thing in my large group of 1300 members. I have started removing some of the longer bouncing ones, after repeated attempts to resolve the situation. I hate to unsub anyone, but it is necessary sometimes. There are many groups who have inflated numbers of members, because there are so many bouncing memebers.
     may I also address the profile fiasco that is going on at the moment? I feel that at least group owners should have been notified of the new formats AHEAD of time! This has been a mess, and continues to be a mess, and this is of Yahoo’s making and no one else’s. I am dealing with anywhere from 1500 to 1800 people in my groups, and I do not exactly know how to explain this to them. I only found out by accident from another group owner that let me know that information had been removed form profiles by Yahoo. What si the point in this? If we wanted to be on Facebook or MySpace we would be. They are too open, and yahoo groups affords a measure of privacy that those other services do not.
     I can tell that I have lost the last 4 days answering questions from sleep deprived, confused people, and it went on all weekend. I got less aleep than I usually do, and that isn;t much!
     Thank you. I hope Yahoo listens to us owners. I work hard to keep my groups up and going, and we do not get much back up from Yahoo sometimes. it can be very frustrating.
     One more question. Why, all those years ago did you remove the chat rooms for the groups?! IM is not an option. it is not the same thing at all. I would love to find out what the reasoning behind that was!
     Thank you.
     Donna

212. Laura said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 8:34 pm

     I think 30 days is much too short – I was more than 30 days with no power after Hirrcane katrina, and I am sure there are other natural disasters where this could also hold true. However, I think 6 months is too long… 90 days seems to be a happy medium.
     90 days with no contact or group activity by the owner and 90 days to reply might be the most fair scenario, but I could see 90/30 working also.

     Who should become the new owner? That is difficult. There are group bullies and spammers, so number of posts really doesn’t seem to be a good indication. I think a vote by the group members would be a very good idea. Members know who is “leading” and can best select who most represents the values of the group.

     I think assigning an heir would be a good idea, but I also think all lists should be co-moderated. If anything happens to me, EVER, please give ownership of my groups to my moderators.

     Thank you for taking this much needed action.

     Laura

213. Jeanne said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 8:38 pm

     As there are many possible situations that can result in a moderator going missing, I suggest a simple statement be included in the terms for groups that a group may be assigned to one of the moderators to manage if the owner cannot be contacted. Period.
     Require at least one other moderator to be assigned when a group is started and let the owner STAY the owner even if that owner goes missing. The alternate moderator can do the work of the group. Block the owner from dealing with the group but give him/her a way to contact yahoo to resume handling the group and allow your staff to decide if the owner should be restored.
     An owner could have extenuating circumstances – in hospital, kidnapped, in a coma or something which would exceed any arbitrary time that could be set.
     Just make it real easy.
     Leave the owner the owner, have the owner disignate an alternate at the time of start up and call it good.
     Any other situations can be taken on a case by case basis.
     
     J

214. Georganne Hampton said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 8:46 pm

     Our group owner died! There were a few of us moderators to keep up the work but most of it I have taken over, proudly. We have over a thousand members with about 1000 messages per month. At the time of the death, the owners sister tried to get yahoo groups to turn it over to me and make me the owner but since the sister didn’t have the owner’s passwords, it couldn’t be done, even with the death certificate. Our group has lasted a few years now with no official owner. It would be nice to have owner status but obviously, we have been managing without.

     Thanks.

215. Lenny said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 8:47 pm

     * What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?
     >> 30 days if the owner’s email is bouncing. 90 days if it’s not bouncing.
     * Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?
     >> Notify the group that the owner has abandoned the group and that a new owner is being sought out and ask for volunteers. If nobody volunteers, the group should be deleted.
     >> Allow 30 days for people to reply.
     >> Ownership rights should go to people in the following order of preference
     >>1st – moderators with longest tenure in the group, then members with longest tenure.

     * What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?
     >> See above
     * What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?
     >> Too little, too late.
     * What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.
     >> This is a LONG TIME coming. I myself have been a member of an abond

216. Raj said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 8:54 pm

     Good idea. We also need a method of protection to return control of a group that was hijacked. A group owner whose login email ID has been hijacked will not be able to administer a group. Some of us have two IDs as owner – back door.

     A lost/hijacked group request may send emails to all IDs of the owner and if there is a response then the group control should be changed as per the request.

217. WillowRaven said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 9:07 pm

     I think the ability to name a successor is a great idea. I also think that naming a moderator as owner in the case that the original owner is unreachable or no longer interested or (in some case) passed away, is also a great idea. I’m in one group (run by a very good friend of mine) – she passed away a lil over a year ago, and none of us that were left on the group had the ability to do anything with the group in regards to running it. There are a couple of us with limited moderator abilities, but not enough to run the group totally. I’m also sole moderator of a few groups where the owner has pretty much abandoned it – I’ve done what I can to keep it running however I was left with limited abilities and they get hit with quite a bit of spam – I don’t even have the ability to ban them on one group! It’s to the point where the list members don’t even want to post because the spam has gotten so out of control. It would be nice, in those cases, for Yahoo to be able to override some sort of ‘time frame’ and appoint someone immediately to owner, where it is clear the owner has been missing for a set amount of time (for example, 6 months, or a year). I think this issue really needs to be addressed and solutions brought about and enacted upon because this seems to be a more common problem than what I think Yahoo initially thought. And just deleting the group is not a solution as there are many groups where the list members are desiring the group to continue – they just need an active owner and moderators to tend it!

     Anyways, I’ve been part of yahoogroups for about 7 years now, owning and/or moderating about 30 of them for about the past 6, so have had a lot of experience in the management aspect of running a group in yahoogroups. Personally I prefer yahoogroups over many of the other email-group providers and feel that there are a lot of positives to the service, and hoping that this issue with missing owners is one matter I hope Yahoo resolves quickly.

218. Greg said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 9:13 pm

     I presently own or co-own some 20 groups. Obviously, they don’t all have the same levels of activity.

     I’d recommend some sort of email to the owners some 30 days after a moderator action is missed. Such as moderated messages or members not being approved or denied. Then maybe give another month or so to confirm.

     As for whom assumes ownership, if there is a moderator that would be the obvious choice. If there is not, perhaps it would be possible to have members vote for a new owner?

219. MIke said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 9:20 pm

     Hmm… Group owner went missing some years ago, and all we get now is spam and the occasional new member who would really like to participate, but is turned off due to the spam.

     Perhaps if the group voted to promote a senior member to moderator status, maybe a polling place with a time limit could be setup for this, notification to member list (non-bouncing emails only)? The group owner in this case is no longer a Yahoo! member. we’re sad!

220. Nancy said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 9:21 pm

     I think 30 days without response is a good length of time. If you are unresponsive for more than 30 days, someone should take over. I think that appointing a second in command at startup is a good idea.
     The only problem I can see with this is that alot of times when you start a group, you dont have a secondary member to appoint. I own a paint shop/Incredimail group and I am the sole owner and I am the only one who posts my creations and tubes. When I began my “always list” I didnt have any members but me. Perhaps you can give the owner a grace period to appoint someone?
     I see a couple of problems with Yahoo simply appointing a random member…A) what if that member doesnt want the responsibility? I know there are some groups I belong to that I wouldnt want to be owner for one reason or another. I enjoy the shares, but am not interested in more responsibility than that. B) what if the person they appoint is not liked by the other members? The person who posts the most or has been there the longest is not always the best person for the job.
     I think that having a link that any member can access to report the abscence of an owner is a good idea. Then Yahoo can check into the last time the owner has posted and maybe send them a warning email letting them know that their group has been reported. Then if no response, ownership can go to an appointed member (if the owner has made one) or to an existing Mod of the group…then if there is not one or they are not interested then perhaps to the member that reported the missing owner in the first place?
     As far as the owner coming back…I dont think they should be able to claim it again. I say that the person who took over should make that decsion. If the owner returns the replacement owner can return control to them if they are willing to do so, but if they want to retain ownership, they should have that ability too. They stepped up and shouldnt be suddenly shoved aside just because the owner decided to return.
     In my opinon, if you are a group owner, you have a responsibility to that group and there is no excuse for just disappearing. Even if you get into a serious car accident or something that keeps you in the hospital for a month, there is no reason you couldnt get a friend or family member to contact someone in the group or post a message to the group to let them know the situation. Just my thoughts…

221. WillowRaven said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 9:22 pm

     QUOTE: I think the time frame should be the same as Yahoo’s requirements for how long a regular email account goes inactive and is reclaimed by Yahoo. I’m not sure what that is, but I don’t think someone who has been gone from their own group for more than three months, certainly six, should expect that group to be his/hers when they get back. /ENDQUOTE

     I agree…. however I think that the activity level of the group should also be taken in to consideration as well. There are some groups that are set up to be a newsletter type group, or just do not have a lot of activity, and it’s not because the list members are no longer interested, but due to a bunch of other reasons, and the more specific a group is (topic/subject), the possibility that it will, at some points at least, have times of inactivity. However, I think 6 months sounds good for an owner to be inactive before considering making someone else the owner. I am in a group where the owner has been bouncing for almost 3 YEARS. We have tried to contact him, message him, you name it – no luck. The moderators have just so much they can do. We have run the group the best we can, however, again, if someone had the abilities of owner, the group could be run so much more efficiently, and for the benefit of the list members, which is why the list was developed to begin with.

     The other concern I have heard from list members is that a group may be cancelled because the owner has gone missing or because there is little to no activity on the list for a set time. I think deleting a group under those circumstances (where Yahoo is making that decision, not the list owner/moderators), is unfair and should not be done.

222. Peter said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 9:25 pm

     There has been lots of good ideas discussed here tonight!

     Personally, I think that if a list has been taken overe by spam and the owner “has left the building” and there is someone who is willing to try to reverse the takeover, there should be a way that that person can apply to Yahoo to take over the group.

     At that time Yahoo should start the clock on replacing the owner. I would suggest a 90 day window where Yahoo polls the list members announcing that whereas the list appears to have lost moderating capabilities, a request has been put forward by (member’s name/e-mail address) to assume the duties of moderator and ownership/co-ownership of the list. Also at this time Yahoo would attempt to contact the list owner.

     If after 90 days the owner has not been contacted, the new owner would be installed. The old owner would also remain as a moderator/co-owner.

     In the 90 day period any other list member would have the option of putting their name forward as a moderator. During this period, the Owner/moderators would have limited access to the membership list to allow them to cut off posting privileges to spammers and do needed approvals..

     In the case of the death of the list owner, members should be able to contact Yahoo and inform them of the situation. In this case an interim moderator can be set up to carry out spam control, and approvals of new members and messages etc. Some proof of death should be used to hasten the turnover to new control.

     I think it is important that any takeover of a list needs to originated from within the list unless there are special circumstances.

     One are of concern I have is that on many spam rich lists, subscribers do mot watch the list too closely. When a post is generated by Yahoo to inform of a possible replacement of a list owner, the post needs to over ride the no post set up that many people use. In this way all person’s on the list get the meassage when the process begins.

     I want to thank ?Jami and Yahoo staff for tackling this problem that most of us have ran accross all to many times!!

     Peter

223. Joan said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 9:26 pm

     I do believe that yes, there should be a placement for abandoned groups. Several of the groups in the model horse hobby I am in have owners absentee for a very long time, taken over by spam and whatnot. These are groups that don’t have moderators. Every single list I own/run has at least two moderators, and I do plan on making my most active list, a co-ownership.

     All lists should be required to have a moderator and/or co-owner in order to have a list. My moderators are actively involved in the lists I own/run and if I know I am going to be out of town, I notify them of that so they can handle any moderated status that needs to be taken care of that I normally do on a daily basis.

     If you own/run a group and don’t have a moderator, ask the group for volunteers, if an owner is absent, a new owner should be promoted from the moderator ranks of that list. One of the lists I am on is huge, and requires at least six moderators who work independently from the group owner.

     Given to how some lists are, a 30 day owner missing is more than reasonable.

224. Steve said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 9:40 pm

     If the owner address starts bouncing, 30 days.

     Selection by most active poster may end up putting a spammer in charge.

     In my case, I used to own a Yahoogroup for a computer club. I had a new business taking up my time so I transferred owner status to another member who has subsequently stopped managing the group and abandoned his Yahoo ID. The moderators have also abandoned the group, at most they’ll respond to say they don’t know what to do, and won’t even try to contact Yahoo to get this straightened out.

     I’d like to be made listowner again. The list has been taken over by spammers.

     If a listowner simply stops responding (moderated messages, membership requests, etc.), 30 days and appoint a new listowner with full ownership status.

     If the listowner address has started bouncing, 30 days and appoint a new listowner with full ownership status.

     In both cases, post to the group and see who volunteers, then ask the membership to vote if more than one volunteers.

     In both cases, if the previously missing listowner comes back, take no action. Let the new listowner decide whether or not to restore the previously missing listowner.

     Thirty days may seem harsh, but a group can die or be taken over by spammers quickly. There is nothing to stop the new listowner from restoring the previously missing listowner.

225. Stu said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 9:46 pm

     About blooming time! 6 months is plenty to establish that an owner is gone. The ability to appoint a successor is needed for sure. Not all groups are large enough to handle multiple moderators, but still need to have someone designated just in case. I have a fledgling group which is still struggling to get off the ground. It is too early to tell who would be a good choice, but I sure do want the ability to set this up.

     Whoever in Yahoo staff who does the appointing when there is no named successor certainly will need to be ready to spend AT LEAST half an hour researching who is the local blowhard versus who is a real contributor. That will require a little effort & skill, and God help us if this becomes a two minute bureaucratic process.

226. Shari Smith said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 9:52 pm

     Well I think this is going a bit to far personally.
     “this Guideline might inform group owners that they are responsible for monitoring group activity to make sure the group remains true to its purpose and that pending messages and members are processed in a timely fashion.”

     If the owner is there and active, they should be able to do whatever they want as long as they are following Yahoo’s ToS. If they don’t want to approve people that’s up to them as they are the creator and owner of the group. If they want to change the purpose why can’t they? Again if they have created it, and are the owner, they should be able to do so. Members are able to leave.

     30 days is not enough time time to remove a group from someone. Many people have things happen in life, and yes there should be two people with the ability to manage a group, but if someone gets sick, goes on vacation, has an accident, they can easily be MIA for 30 days.

     Right now there is no way to do this at all. I would suggest some type if button that can request a response, and if not responded to starts a count down. At 30 days, a warning is sent indicating that they have not responded to a request for contact. Every 10 days, another email should be sent. At 60 days, a transfer should be started, and at 90 days put into place.

     The transfer of ownership should 1st be offered to any moderators, and if nobody takes up the offer, then to the entire membership. If more then one person responds for ownership they should be placed into a poll, and the membership should vote. This could all begin at the 60 day point, and at the 90 day point the person with the most votes gets JOINT ownership of the group. The original owner, and the group should not be able to be deleted for a year, maybe 6 months, but this should take longer then 3 months. This would give the new owner almost total control of the group but would allow for the original owner the possibility of returning.

     The exception to this would be a group that deals with children. I was involved in a Girl Scout group that was deserted, and once that was known all the creeps came out of the woodwork. So there should be some way to expedite at least a moderator being assigned in any group that is set up towards children.

     Other then the exception, I believe there would be a way to automate everything I’ve suggested.

     Shari

227. Dick said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 9:59 pm

     I’m a fan of “2 months no owner activity” and “2 months after notification”.
     Bouncing owner mail might shorten the “no activity”, with the “notification” being sent to the group membership.

     How you assign a new owner may involve a -lot- of work on Yahoo’s part, if there’s no obvious moderators to draw from.

     Usually, reading a screenful or two of abstracts will show obvious active and “intelligent” members who would probably be good choices. Asking for volunteers and granting some/all of them the ability to be “owners” is feasible, but may lead to squabbles.

     There are some groups where the owner is not very active in the postings, but still keeps an active eye on the goings-on. The email notification will handle them, and, when responded to, perhaps grant a year’s grace before the next one.

     Whatever you do, the first implementation is going to generate a -lot- of work.
     If you’ve archived the previous “our owner is Dead!” messages, that will give you a starter-set of groups who’d appreciate service.

     good luck

228. Nick Spence said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 10:00 pm

     I am so glad you all are really planning to take action on this.

     I would think that 6 months of non-response and inactivity would be plenty of time. You can’t use log-ins as a test, though. I very seldom log-in. I do it all by e-mail.

     The test should start when a group member notifies you that a group has been deserted. This could be totally automated via a form where you attempt to contact the group owner. After 6 months of non-response to your attempts, put the group up for adoption. If there are any moderators, allow them to apply. Then promote any who did as co-owners. If there are no moderators, allow the members to apply. Then hold a vote of the membership. I believe your fine programmers can make all of this automated with few initial bugs. I searched the webring site to see what their criteria is, but couldn’t find it spelled out, though I do know they have an adoption program. It is probably imperfect, but any program will be better than the one Yahoo doesn’t have now.

     By the way, I have been a member of one group that has been without an owner or moderator for over five years. It is nothing but a spam haven. The only reason I am a member, is to direct new members to the site we started to replace it. Unfortunately, the original site ranks high due to the large membership list, which isn’t really high, because no one deletes the several thousand bouncing members.

     On another list where I am a moderator, there are people who have applied for membership (currently about 42) a long time ago. I don’t have the ability to approve or deny them, and the owner seems to be disappearing as he doesn’t even respond to my e-mails. He would be a candidate for a warning….

     Thanks for your efforts,
     ~Nick

229. John said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 10:00 pm

     I would put in a provision in the quideline that yahoogroups would have a right to delete the group is the group owner cannot be contacted anymore, or reassign ownership status…but yahoo would have to first verify that the owner cannot be contacted, that the group has been abandoned, that someone in the group is willing to accept ownership…

     yahoogroups could also make it a requirement to have at least 2 additional active moderators with “full” powers…or a co-owner…

     i am assuming of course that this abandoned group status means that only the owner is inactive and not the group…

230. Shari Smith said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 10:02 pm

     Something I just thought of, if a group is a newsletter/announcement type group as someone said above. If there are no moderator, I think the group should be deleted, and not turned over to someone else. With this type of list, your dealing with one persons expressions, and they own them.

231. Dan said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 10:05 pm

     I am a member of a group whose owner had disappeared – their email was bouncing – there were no moderators. I had to bug Yahoo repeatedly to get some relief – they finally allowed us to have a poll to pick a moderator – I was picked, and we set up a few additional moderators – but we still have no owner.

     6 months seems too long, if a group is being spammed, or flamed. At least do what you did for us – appoint a moderator – you can wait longer to appoint an owner. I don’t think there is anything I cannot do as a moderator – except keep another moderator from removing my moderator status and hijacking the group.

     Dan

232. De-De said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 10:05 pm

     Okay, I’m thinking that it would be good to have an additional step when setting up a group, giving the owners some options. Let that person choose between 3,6, and 12 months of their personal inactivity before they are considered to have abandoned. (Someone with serious medical problems might prefer a shorter time, for instance.) Let the new owner pick from: 1. promote a moderator (only available as a choice if one has been named), 2. promote a specific person or persons, 3. 1 week group poll for new owner, 4. ownership reverts to Yahoo to pick owner or close at their discretion. This could also be set up to allow the owner to number these steps in the order they would like to see them enacted.

     Choosing these options could be required during group creation, but also left available for editing by the owner as the group develops. If this page were created, it could also be required that current owners update their choices now (with automated reminders weekly for perhaps 2 months until done?), and a system like this would allow flexibility that accepts that not all groups are alike in their needs and consistency, nor are the dynamics of any group a static situation. In addition, requiring this page to be completed retroactively would provide a red flag to Yahoo in regard to groups with currently inactive owners.

     Also, I think it would be an excellent idea for owners to be required to supply two working email addresses and a snail mail addy when creating a group – also updatable, of course. Having two emails registered would help cover situations where one was deactivated by cyber-accident, and snail mail addy (visible only to Yahoo and the group moderators?) would cover situations involving health problems and death of owner.

233. Khris said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 10:11 pm

     If there are moderators already selected then fair enough the new co-owner should come from there.
     If you are looking at seniority as a criteria then you could have issues.
     1) They may not be interested.
     2) They may be effectively very inactive, as opposed to newer members.
     3) I would be suggesting that if there are issues of No mods and no owners about then look at those who go to the trouble of contacting you. They obviously have enough of an interest in the group to try to get help to sort out the issues.
     4) I think that as a matter of course that the owner should select at least 2 mods to help with the group who can take over if that is required, as part of setting up the group.

     said my piece for what it is worth.

     Khris

234. Dooku said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 10:12 pm

     Barrow some good admin tips from UnderNet (one of the biggest functional IRC net remaining):

     - when the group manager doesn’t login (on yahoo I guess, not only on groups.yahoo.com because if he does login on that account reading the e-mails for example I’m sure he can also recive an e-mail from the groups telling him that he failed to login/check the groups that he owns) a vote will be held among the moderators.
     - add the temp owner option (aloso like on undernet) where the owner can leave a succesor for a period of time ( 2 – 6 months ) but only one that has moderator status can be choosen. but if the original owner makes this decision his access will be suspended in the group for that time.
     - add the permanent owner change option (but I think this exists already)

235. Shae said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 10:14 pm

     I think you need to have no less than 3 months and there also needs to be some sort of leeway for those that unavoidably are in this position, I have begun to set up my group but have not published it yet due to me having Acute Myeloid Leukemia but would be devastated to find my group had been taken away from me while I am so ill and given to someone else.
     I think this is a good idea but careful screening will need to be done both of the owners reasons and of potential new Owners

236. Emmy said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 10:35 pm

     As a group owner and someone who has dealt with this issue, I think 2 months is plenty of time for a group owner to respond to inquiries from Yahoo.

     They should recieve at least 6 emails from Yahoo asking them to start moderating their group, and to reply to the inquiry.

     If they don’t respond, Yahoo should appoint a new owner from the existing active moderators.

     If there aren’t any, they should appoint one from the membership, selecting someone who is already either an owner or a moderator on other Yahoo groups. This new owner should be INVITED to become a new co-owner, and if they accept, they are granted that status.

     I believe Yahoo should continue to try to follow up with the original owner of the group for a total of 1 year, and at that time, the original owner should be made a member, rather than an owner, as they are probably dead or have completely lost interest. At this point it would be up to the new owner to delete them if their email keeps bouncing.

237. Aurora said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 10:35 pm

     6 months to a year. Many of us are at a stage in life where family emergencies can take over. I also feel if it is known the owner won’t be coming back [death] there should be a way to expedite take over.
     I’ve named others to the position in the past, they’ve since moved on so perhaps a poll for the members to choose from either the moderators or the members.

238. rakanjan said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 11:04 pm

     tanks for you

239. msm said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 11:06 pm

     1 month is no where near enough time. Recently the owner of one of the groups I mod on had surgery. Recovery took longer than antisipated and the owner mail went bouncing for over 5 weeks as the owner was unable to even use a computer at that time. I believe yahoo gives you 4 months to reactivate a bouncing email, why not at least that long to return to a group?
     I belong to many groups where owners are gone. Some run smoothly and some are just waiting to restart. I would hate to see important files lost because of group closure, yet they can not be moved due to copyright/ownership. There is gold in the archives of some groups.

240. Curt said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 11:10 pm

     Sorry I don’t agree with the majority here. I think you guys are just wrong to want members to be able to steal a list so easily.

     30 days in definately not enough to time to take someone’s group away. Things happen in life. If I’ve had a group for 10 years you better not take it away from me because I can’t be around for a month or two after 10 years. The members can chill out. When I get back I’ll deal with whatever problems have come up. Give me a break. Also, don’t even try to tell me that I have to have a co-owner for my groups. There is nothing worse than having two decision makers on a list with strong personalitites in play. Comments like that can only come from people who have not had to deal with such issues. Groups with these kinds of problems need a single decision maker who can step in, lay down the law and stop the flame wars in their tracks (with punative meansures if necesary). If there are two owners that do not agree then that only leads to prolonged discussion and further problems. If I want to appoint someone while I’m gone I will do so. That is MY CHOICE. Nobody else can determine of someone in the group is trustworthy enough to run the things while I’m away or if the group is even of a nature where that sort of thing is necessary at all. This policy will only work if it is reserved for groups that have been truly abandoned for VERY LONG PERIODS OF TIME. None of this 30 day stuff. For all you know I would fix the roblem in a heartbeat but your message is being caught by a spam filter or something. Don’t try to steal my group because you don’t like that fact that I have a life and took off for longer than you like!!!!! The fact is that if I start a group I do NOT have a responsibility to you. I have a family and a job and a life. I do my best to keep the group running as smoothly as possible and it typically runs without trouble. But, again, give me a break! You aren’t paying me to be in the group, you aren’t paying Yahoo to join the group. Nobody has a responsibility here.

     Now, most of us ARE responsible to our groups and maintain them in good working order. Most of us take care to make sure things will go smoothly when we go away for extended periods of time. However, don’t go enforcing policies on us because every once in a while somebody disappears on a sabatical or goes to the hospital to take care of a sick family member and has the nerve to not share ownership of the group with a bunch of whining list members.

     Again, sorry I don’t agree with the majority here. I think you guys are just wrong to want members to be able to steal a list so easily.

241. msm said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 11:14 pm

     One more thought sorry for not adding it in the second post. Would it be possible for yahoo to send out a monthly notice to all group owners, that reqired a link to be clicked to verify they were still interested and able to be the owner of their group. After 4 missed consecutive clicks, a warning could be sent that required action?

242. Joe said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 11:24 pm

     I would like to look at this issue a little differently. Internet has made internetworking a way of social interaction. So why not take some of the real life brick and mortar ways and apply it to disk and router ways?

     A typical real life club or society will have a set of founding members who define the constitution or charter of association. The rules of association forms the guidelienes for perpetuity of the club or society. The founding members form the initial governing board and then lay down rules how they are retired/changed/elected for future. The charter defines who can be member, how do members interact, how can a member leave, how can a new member be added etc.

     Here is an example. A club a governing board consisting of a President, a few VPs, a Secretary, a Treasurer, a few Advisors. There are ordinary members who form the member public. The rules stipulate that member public elects new governing board every 2 years.

     Another example. A society governing body has a President, a Secretary and a Treasurer. The governing board is a perpetual body and a replacement to a retiring member is made by concensus of the remaining governing boady members. The members of the society are exclusively sons, daughters, spouse of the existing members. A new member may be added only with the approval of ALL the existing members.

     So as you see, there are many forms of association in real life and some of it may be applied to the internet interactions also. How does one determine what is relevant and what is not?

     This depends on the opinion of the existing members as well as the intent of Y! It is entirely possible to run a profit making company virtually on the internet where the employees are members and the governing board is the owner/moderator group of people. Ofcourse, for this there needs to be ways of monetary exchange which is not technically possible at the present moment. However, this is within the realm of technical feasibility and I dont see why it should be ruled out. So on one hand, Y! needs to define what its objectives are and where they would like to draw a line. On the other hand, the current owner/moderator community should agree how much of a charter driven community association can be defined upfront.

     Here is what I suggest. When creating a group, the Owner must necessarily have a list of founding members whom he/she trusts to perpetuate the group. The minimum number can be decided on the number of members he expects the group to grow into (say 3% of the expected group membership). All these founding members are potential moderators. The perpetuating members are considered “alive” if they show some group activity every 3 months. If they do not show such activity they will be sent a “Are you active” automated message by Y! If they do not respond to that, then another member is promoted to moderator status. The same rule applies to the Owner also and a moderator is promoted to Owner status if the Owner fails to respond. The most active member/moderator may be first considered for “promotion” depending on the number of APPROVED POSTS in the community. These simple rules will make it fairly automatic to run a simple group in perpetuity. Y! may also define rules to define what is an active group. If there is no member activity for a certain period of time, the group may be archived and be considered for deletion later.

243. Donald Kinney said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 11:28 pm

     A year ago I submitted a suggestion with most of these guidelines. The easy way for Yahoo to do this is to set up a script so that someone on the group over 90 days can ask for ownership via the group_owner email address.

     A flag in the Yahoo database for groups could be used to indicate if there is a ownership challenge. If the flag is set then no other challenges will be allowed. A simple web page stating that the ownership has been challenge already would work. Also the script would be able to see the person has challenged for any ownership during the last 90 days and if so deny the challenge. Any challenge would change the person’s flag date to the new date. This would also only allow the person to challenge one group within 90 days.

     An active owner would know which member is challeging the ownership and they would deny giving up ownership and possible removing the member from the group. This should prevent people from trying to highjack a group for their own proposes.

     A good owner will set another member to moderate the group if they are going on vacation. When the owner gets back they would change the moderator back to regular membership or keep them as a moderator.

     If the original owner shows back up they would tell the new owner of the fact using the group owner address and the two would discuss the ownership.

     If Yahoo set the script so a new co-owner is just added the new co-owner could at a later date remove the old owner.

     Doanld Kinney

244. Robert Brenchley said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 11:31 pm

     I’ve been a member of a group in this situation, and well remember the frustration it caused. I think it’s fair enough to have a procedure.

245. Dave Brooks said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 11:35 pm

     Our group owner died in June 2006, there are no other moderators. His email has been bouncing for over 2 years. The only members that post on that group now are spammers and trolls. If group ownership was passed to a member on the basis of activity, it’s likely to be a troll.

     I have set up a new group to replace that one & whilst there are no other moderators, the committee of our group have the password in a sealed envelope, should anything happen to me.

     The members of our group do not wish anyone to take the old group over, just merely to delete it. I have contacted Yahoo! directly regarding this several times and have had no reply.

     Dave Brooks

     I have contacted

246. Chrispy said,

     October 21, 2008 @ 11:39 pm

     When the owner of one Yahoo group I’m both a moderator and member of, decided to disappear, he did the right thing in passing on ownership to me, ensuring someone was there to take over. As the group is a health support one, I decided to ask and appoint a co-moderator to become co-owner as well. I felt this was important in case either one or the other felt unable to keep an active profile, due to health issues for an extended time, ensuring there was always someone available to take care of members, approve new members etc.

     Perhaps any new groups starting up should be asked to appoint a moderator/s as well as an owner to ensure there is someone to automatically take over should the owner be unable to stay active for a specified time. Having such a plan set in place from the beginning should at least pevent this problem happening from now on. For groups already set up where an owner has disappeared, after a certain time frame and if the owner can’t be contacted, another moderator or member should be appointed to take over.

247. Nico said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 12:06 am

     We know that group activities vary greatly. Some has hundreds of mails each day, some only got several mails a week. I think the time frame for inactive/unreachable owner should be between 3-6 months.

     Regarding concerns about the owner might be back someday, perhaps the newly-appointed co-owner can change the group settings such as appointing/removing moderators or other major preferences (which is usually why we need a new owner anyway), but he cannot remove/change the previous owner’s status or delete the group. That way we can still have the benefits of having an active owner, but also protect the original owner’s rights if he reappear someday.

     For criteria, I’m totally agree to the idea about YGroups-wide reputation instead of within the group alone. Post counts may not reflect someone with good credibility, but being owners and moderators of several large groups may. Maybe it is time YGroups implement a reputation system, similar if not better than the ones used in forums/bulletin boards.

248. chand said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 12:10 am

     i love beauty

249. Carole Johnson said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 12:13 am

     I like the plan to promote another moderator to group owner if the original owner is unresponsive for about 3 months.
     You should ask the other moderator if they want to be the owner, and if not, who they would suggest to be the owner.

250. Ozair Kafray said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 12:35 am

     * What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?

     Can be a ratio of (mails coming on the group)*(0.2) where 0.2 represents that owner shall at least be reading/moderating 5 mails per day. And the first factor is activity on the group so an owner owning an active group has more responsibility than a small group.

     * Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?

     I think yahoo shall promote a moderator, depending on his/her activity

     * What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?

     1. Look for an active member.
     2. If no member is active, or no mails are coming at all then
     i. Warn owner about deletion of group
     ii. After expiry of warning time, send a warning message to all group members.
     iii. After expiry of warning time delete group.
     iv. If above procedure repeats 3 consecutive times, delete group.

     * What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?

     Making him a moderator seems to be the middle ground, but if owner looses interest in a group and now a group has taken another direction, the owner shall/can start as a member again.

     * What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.

251. Dave Walker said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 12:37 am

     I’ve been running my group now for some 3 years since the owner moved on, I think any move that give me the full control that I need to keep this active group running can only be a good thing.

252. Barbie said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 12:43 am

     Why not just make it a rule that there be 2 co-owners of a list when it is started . I have a list and I started and set it up but gave ownership to another lady to run it , then stayed a moderator and now we have 3 of us co-owners and this I believe is a good way to go , I was happy when we could do co-owners . We have people die and if one owner dies then we have another to take over . Haven’t had time to read all posts yet but good luck with it all
     Kind Regards
     Barbie

253. Alf Cousins said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 12:46 am

     Any group member can report owner deliquency at any time to a yahoogroups gatekeeper.
     The gatekeeper will email the last active address of the owner and wait for a reply for 30 days. If a reply is given, the owner should be reminded of their obligations and allowed to continue.
     If no reply is given, the gatekeeper should email a group notice asking members of the group if they can establish contact with the owner. If no contact is made within a further 14 days, the gatekeeper shall notify the group that they should promote one or more members to become group owner. The gatekeeper shall exercise discretion in the selection process and shall facilitate the group’s choice.
     Works for me.

254. Rosie2000 said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 12:58 am

     I think all abandoned groups that show as having their main message content now as spam should be automatically deleted.
     Any group that has not been posted to for the last 2 months should also be automatically deleted.

255. jonathon said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 1:09 am

     > Group owners who do not take any action in their group for an extended period of time may receive a notification that they are risk of having another member promoted to co-owner status.

     That period should be for a minimum of _ONE_ year. Two years is not out of the question. (I’ve seen too many accounts where the list-owners yahoo account became inaccessible. After roughly a year, the list owner can wrest back the groups, by creating a new yahoo user ID, if they linked the old user id to an external account. )

     I’d make an exception if the list-owner is provably deceased. (Death certificates are not proof of the demise of the individual.)

     > The owner will then have some period of time to respond to this notification. If the owner responds, then nothing will change in their group.

     The average individual has ten email addresses. All ten need to be contacted, before the individual is deemed “unreachable”. If Yahoo can’t reach them, then it needs to spend the time/effort to locate them.

     > But if the group owner fails to respond within a specified time frame,

     That should be a minimum of 90 days, and 180 days isn’t unreasonable.
     If both the external address, and yahoo address, and _all_ other addresses associated with the user are bouncing, then post a message to the list requesting that they contact Yahoogroups management.

     > If there are no moderators, then the new owner will be automatically selected from the Group membership based on some combination of seniority and participation.

     Whilst that sounds nice in theory, on one list I subscribe to, where the owner is missing in action, the most prolific poster is somebody whose emails are always off topic. (I’ve yet to see that prolific poster post on any list, with a message that can be construed in any fashion whatsoever, as being on topic.)

     The reason the owner is missing in action: Their password was changed on them, and they can’t get into that account..

     There are some lists where the owners and moderators are not expected/allowed to participate. Promoting a prolific poster to ownership of that type of list might well doom the list.

     > Alternatively, we are also considering giving group owners the ability to name someone as their predecessor should their activity/moderation be inactive for the specified time frame (similar to a living trust).

     I hope you meant “successor in interest”, rather than predecessor.

     Creating a new status, “Successor owner”, would make a transition easier, when the list owner appoints somebody who has little or no experience in moderating lists.

     I’d make the time frame for promotion to “List Owner”, from “Successor Owner” be at least 180 days, unless demonstrable proof of the demise of the list owner was present. (Assuming death certificates were not considered to be adequate evidence of the demise of the list owner.)

     xan

     jonathon

256. Hans said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 1:14 am

     Hi,

     Because of the reasons mentioned in this response blog, We have decided years ago in the groups that I am owner of, to have at least 2 owners and 2 moderators.

     regards
     hans

257. Alan Milnes said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 1:16 am

     I agree this is a problem and would respond as follows:-

     1) Yahoo should encourage sole owners to appoint a succesor (not a predecessor!!) making clear they would only be promoted in extreme cases.

     2) An initial warning should be sent after 3 months with action taken after 6 months.

     3) Where no succesor has been nominated then a vote of the group members should take place (perhaps weighted by posts made) with the current moderators,if any, being the nominees. No one can vote for themselves.

     4) The promotion should be to co-owner so the origiaml owner re-appearing would still be one of the owners.

258. rwindsor said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 1:55 am

     There is an issue not yet covered, that is the situation equivalent to cyber-squatting where someone holds a “valuable” group name to prevent others from using it.
     I have just placed a poll on a group I have rejoined where the number of bouncing members is almost equal to half the membership and where most of the traffic over the past year or so is spam.
     The moderator is bouncing and the listowner may well be as well as there is no reply to requests fot help (or offers to moderate)
     Regards
     R Windsor
     Listowner AustConADHD

259. artie james said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 1:56 am

     Group owners who do not take any action in their group for an extended period of time may receive a notification that they are risk of having another member promoted to co-owner status.

     ^ that is the best idea i’d go with that.

260. diddy_dave_uk said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 2:39 am

     I think we have to be careful when setting a period of time for inactive owners as with some support groups owners may be absent for an extended period due to ill health etc. Saying that i do agree that new guidelines need to be written up and enforced so that groups who ‘lose’ their owner can have a chance.

     I am a moderator of a few support groups and one of them the owner has not posted or been availble to be contactet since 2002 (a long time a know). Since then i’ve tryed my best as a moderator to keep the group going but am always fighting a lossing battle with the spammers. Its seems the case with some support groups that as the members ‘get better’ they no longer feel they need the group and activity ceases.

     If the ownership of groups could be transfered then they could either be carryed on or in a case where the group has no valid activity it could be closed. I agree that the best way to do this is to transfer ownership to a moderator if one is present and if not the most senior/active member and if this can not be determined then i agree with the sugestions of getting experienced owners from outside the group to take over.

     Thankyou for taking the time to listen to my thought s on this issue and i look forward to seeing what developments are made.

261. Robert Spencer said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 2:54 am

     1. No more than three months from last post before a notification is sent, a notification sent after one month after that and another month before the commencement of appointing a new owner. Groups can be quiet for many months but there appears to be problems with groups with regular postings. Why should their members be in limbo for more than three months?

     2. There should be the option for LO’s to nominate a successor who would automatically take over.

     3. In the event of a successor not being nominated, Yahoo should appoint a new LO from the existing moderators. In the case of no other moderators, a poll should be held over four weeks. (Number of posts per member should not be relevant; most of accept the “95% of posts come from 5% of the members” rule but there are usually a small handful of stirrers in that 5% who would not be accepted by the members as a whole.)

     4. I have to wonder why a LO who abandons a group should be retained as LO, especially after warnings. Leaving members – and their group – in limbo is dereliction of duty. If the group wishes to allow the former LO back, that should be up to the members and should not be automatic.

     5. The matter hasn’t crossed my path, but I do hear there are so many groups out there that have been rudderless for years. I agree action should be taken to clean up these groups but leave the actual process to others who are actually experiencing the problem.

262. Marcia said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 3:11 am

     I think it is about time that this issue was addressed. I am the senior moderator on a group where the owner has left the country and I think very rarely even looks at her emails. My emails do not generate a reply and it is now nearly 3 years since she participated on the group. She has left me with the responsibility for the group with the exception of deleting the group which doesn’t really cause a problem as most members already think I am the owner, but it would be good to clean everything up.

     It is difficult to put a parameter on that if their email bounces they should be deemed uncontactable, as with Yahoo now having unlimited storage, this should never happen.

     As to time away from the group I think you need to be looking at 6 months as some people to go off on extended holidays especially if they are retired and it is not impossible for this to be a situation.

     I think the senior current moderator should be the one to take over as owner of a group, but if not then I think a survey of the current members should be undertaken as to who should take over. Just because a member has been on the group the longest doesn’t mean then participate as a lot lurk.

     Any new owner should be a co-owner in case the original owner pops back up again. I don’t think the original owner should be demoted at all.

263. Tony Clifford said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 3:13 am

     Our owner is elderly. He has asked me to take over the ownership while he is still able to hand over. BUT, being elderly he has forgotten the password of the original email address he used when he set up the ownership/site. He is still alive, he is still compos mentis so you should be able to help. There must be some way. We all know him, we all know his new address, we all respect him and he is doing his best to do the right thing for the group (PLG).
     Thank you
     Tony

264. John Willemsens said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 3:24 am

     This longstanding problem is affecting the good name and reputation of the Yahoo! Groups.

265. Shadow said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 3:27 am

     My bf and I moderate a group where the owner died in a house fire last november. The only way we were able to step in and keep the group going was because the original owner had left one moderator that had the capability to add more moderators. We have never been a huge group, but we are still active. We would like to know how we could get made owners/owner of the group. We did try making a second group like the first but only a handful moved over to the new group, so we closed the new one down.
     Shadow

266. JCP said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 3:42 am

     Thank you for soliciting our input on this important issue.

     There are a lot of groups out there in need of immediate help in naming a new Owner, but other groups should be given a bit longer period of inactivity before Yahoo starts any transition process. In any case, the group members should be able to choose a new Owner rather than Yahoo automatically using some algorithm to “promote” someone.

     Remind Group Owners to Create Their Own Succession Plan
     ===================================

     New group Owners should be required to acknowledge the rules of the Guideline but not be required to name a successor at the beginning. Perhaps a message to the Owner 6 months after the group is set up, or when membership reaches a certain number, reminding them to name a successor Owner or at least a Moderator or two, would be helpful.

     Owners of any existing groups without Moderators or without any Co-Owners should also be sent this reminder message. Repeat the message every 90 days thereafter until others are named.

     When should Yahoo take action?
     ===================

     In general, the time frame for declaring a group abandoned or declaring an Owner as inactive should be based on the activity level of the group. Some groups are not as active as others, either due to smaller numbers or just the nature of the group. There should be no requirement to add new members or to post messages, etc. It is only a problem if there are maintenance tasks that are not being addressed in a timely fashion, or if spammers start taking over a group (in which case I would expect someone to request to be named the Owner).

     If *no one* is responding to group maintenance requests (pending approvals and such) for 30 days, Yahoo should start sending messages asking the Owner to respond. If no response within another 30 days, a new Owner should be determined using a nomination and polling process. If the Owner does respond, Yahoo should encourage them to name a Co-Owner and one or more Moderators to help with the maintenance requests.

     Naming a new Owner should not mean the old Owner is deleted; they should just be made a Co-Owner with the new Owner. That way, if they were in a coma for 6 months or something, they could return whenever they are able, but the group could go on functioning in the meantime.

     Special Situations Require More Immediate Action
     =============================

     Two situations require a shorter time frame for action – no more than 30 days. (1) the Owner’s email is hard bouncing, or (2) group members in an abandoned group are asking Yahoo for help with assigning a new Owner.

     In the first case, a message should be sent to the group notifying them that the Owner cannot be contacted and a new Owner must be named. This may prompt other interested members to request to be named Owner. If there are other Moderators, perhaps a message should only go to them, asking them how they wish to proceed or if one of them is willing to become the Owner. If they can agree, their choice(s) should be made the new Owner(s). If there are no Moderators, or if they cannot agree, the group must follow some sort of nomination and polling process to determine a new Owner.

     In the second case, if a member is asking to be named as Owner, and the existing Owner has been unresponsive, I suggest posting a message to the group saying that “Member A has requested to be made Owner of this group; please respond within 14 days if you have any objection to this change.” If there are no objections, Member A becomes Owner. If there are, then the nomination and polling process should be used.

     Thank you again for soliciting our input on this and for recognizing this as an important issue in the first place.

267. Meryl Sizemore said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 3:54 am

     There must be an Express or Emergency procedure to transfer ownership of a group in the case of the owner’s death or serious illness. Our group has been “Abandoned” for three years, and is carried on by the moderators. The owner dropped her Email ID. However we would like to have one or more of the responsible moderators take over, and we would like Yahoo to allow us to do that without the owner’s consent.

268. CJ said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 3:55 am

     I think 6 months of complete inactivity is a suitable timeframe.

     Over the course of 2 years now I had been contacting yahoo about a humour group called ‘ukhumour’.

     The owner went absent shortly after creating the group (just over 3 years ago) and has been completely out of contact since that time, as many people have already stated, the group became nothing more than a spam farm as he did not appoint any moderators and allowed non-list members to post making the the group a nasty hate-filled place to be.

     A few of us tried to moderate things by attempting to resolve queries and advising people on how to ignore certain mail and not to click strange urls, etc

     Unfortunately Yahoo Customer Service were, less than helpful, and i was constantly told it was against privacy policies to appoint new moderators/ owners and that we should create a new group with a similar name and invite the members to move over.

     Feeling this response was considerably less than adequate, i continued sending emails requesting that the matter be given some serious attention.

     Just over 1 year ago I finally made some progress and managed to get myself and one other person appointed as moderator of the group.

     Since that time we have made great strides in weeding out the undesirable types, have managed to double the number of members and have made the group a fun place to be once again.

     The final step which would make the last 2 years seem worth it is for this to be passed to enable myself to be made owner of the group, i would then appoint a co-owner in Mary and and a couple of moderators (probably the two poor souls who took yahoo’s advice and created new groups).

     Sorry for the long winded response but i’ve been waiting for this announcement for 2 years now and felt it would be a good chance to have you all share my pain!

     Any thoughts or questions are welcome to cj@twao.net

269. suspreena said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 4:14 am

     3 years ago or more when I had my tyshi.geo account I had a 2 person group. When we when 3 months without a post, I was notified if there was no activity the group would go. I nixed the group.

     In 2005 or 2006 I lost access to my tyshi.geo account and created this one. Since I was unable to do anything in Tyshi’s College Days the group with 2 member accounts went inactive. I mostly forgot about it. About 6 weeks ago I got a Spam mail from someone who manage to join. I explained the situation to Yahoo, along with what had happened to that older
     group. I told them tyshi.geo had been inactive for years, and asked if the group TCD could be removed. They asked that I verify info on tyshi.geo which I was not able to do. I suggested they email that account and if there was no answer in say 2 weeks, delete the group. They felt they could not comply with this. So I quit that group.

     My point is, if a group is inactive for say 3 months, send an email to the owner(s) requesting the group be deleted or become active and give a 14 day limit before Yahoo has the option to remove the group. At the time Yahoo can mail Moderators or 2-3 members with seniority in the group and offer ownership. I like the idea of an owner having to select 1-3 Moderators who could become owners in the event of inactivity.

     After the 14 days the back up/new owners are notified of the need for activity or to remove the group. If in 14 more days there is still no action, the groups goes. This can also apply for an active group where a
     moderator or long standing member emails Yahoo with the request for a new owner because the last one(s) has/have not been seen in a long time and are not responding to emails.

270. Deb said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 4:19 am

     I think a reasonable time frame to wait is 1 year in case of death or illness. There should also be a a backup owner/moderator in case of illness.

271. StarHopper said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 4:21 am

     I’m surprised (but not much) that very few seem to be answering the specific questions you asked – at least in the first few dozen responses recorded – that you need to help formulate the new guideline. I’ll get to those straight off:

     • What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?
     I’d say 60-90 days IF Yahoo Support has been contacted by group moderators (first priority) or active members (2nd priority) reporting a problem that needs to be addressed. Yahoo could possibly try contacting the owner & giving them a deadline to react, at which time the wheels would be set in motion to transfer if not replied to; or a shorter period if the OO’s (Original Owner) e-mails are bouncing.

     In cases where no moderator/trustee(s) had been previously appointed, Yahoo could insert a post (after being contacted by members) announcing the process was in motion, by request….and perhaps a poll asking for volunteers to assume ownership. The poll could run 2 to 4 weeks, I think would be a reasonable period for all members to react & participate.

     For one thing, I’d suggest when someone first STARTS a new Group, a new guideline be in place that informs applicants of their expectations (responsibilities) – this should greatly ease Yahoo’s decision making process for transferring when/if needed later. Spell out what will happen due to non-responsiveness, and give the new owner ‘X’ amount of time after startup to appoint a trustee….’X’ being a reasonable period for the owner to determine who among his members, based on their participation & input, would make a GOOD trustee. In cases where the new owner fails, for whatever reason, to appoint one, OR as the appointee might leave the Group before the situation arises, the poll-for-replacement action would take place.

     Perhaps Yahoo could automate this process, sending a reminder to new owners when the ‘Trustee’ field remains un-filled after ‘X’ # of days, and allowing them to check-off a postponement (reminder renewal) if they’re not yet ready to decide…. perhaps twice, maximum before Yahoo inserts a poll requesting response.

     • Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?
     Largely answered above. Perhaps there could be a ‘Request Form’ page that members could access, fill out & submit requesting Yahoo’s attention into the matter(s). First priority would be given requests by existing moderators; or by members (should take 3(?) co-signees?) — and available ONLY if ‘OO’ fails to respond to inquiry by Yahoo.

     • What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?
     To keep Yahoo’s ‘burden’ to the best minimum, I’d say / hope the Poll form would help your decision-making process, as stated above. Surely, there will be an initial ‘deluge’ due to so many boards & so many being ‘derelict’….but that is to be expected. As things get more under control by responsibile members/new owners, the situation will normalize before, hopefully, very long.

     • What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?
     The above-proposed Guidelines for forming new groups should spell this out….and the OO will have to abide by the decision he/she made at the outset — after all, that’s part & parcel of the agreement they made as a condition for being granted the Group.

     • What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.
     I’m sure more will arise – but I think the specific circumstance has been pretty well covered by what I’ve provided herein. Please feel free to contact me if further developments warrant — I am very eager to participate in helping solve what I see as a long-standing crucial problem with the Yahoo Groups functions, and hope the suggestions I’ve provided are helpful.
     ~Star*Hopper

272. Deb said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 4:22 am

     I think that a reasonable time to wait would be a year in case of death or illness. I also think that there should be a backup moderator in case of illness where the moderator can’t perform his or her duties.

273. Gordon said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 4:26 am

     I moderate a couple of groups as well as owing groups of my own. When the owner of one group knew he was going into hospital for some time he made me moderator with the same powers as the owner, i.e. to approve or remove members and to delete the group. He subsequently returned to run the group, but the arrangement remains in place.

     With my own groups I have appointed a trusted friend as co-owner in each group so that, if I become unavailable to run any of the groups, someone else is able to take over.

     I would think that an owner who is absent for more than three months without making prior provision for someone to run the group in their absence should be considered as having abandoned the group.

274. Cheri said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 4:32 am

     I can understand an owner maybe being unable to get to a group for a while being sick or a hardship. I think it would be a good idea for owners to have C0-Owners to begin with or a Mod that can access the group files and approve people. I CO-Own several groups and I also am owner of all those groups under two yahoo ID’s in case something ever happens to one of my accounts. I have in the past found my groups missing and had to write to yahoo to have them restored, anything can happen. I agree with someone above that the new person appointed should have experience in running groups and have a good standing before being made a Owner; not just because of how long they have been in a group or how much they post. I simply don’t get how you are going to check to see if an owner is doing their job unless people complain and then who knows if the complaints are valid. So starting with Mods or CO-Owners is what should be a top concern so you know for sure the group is totally abandoned or not. Just my 2 cents…LOL

275. Jim said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 4:48 am

     I think the notice by designate email and notice on the group home page should be no less than three months.

     If nobody replies (and there are no moderators) in that time then a poll could be held to elect a new owner. That elected person or persons could assume all but ‘delete group’ privileges for three more months, then if the original owner fails to show then the moderator(s)automatically is/are automatically made owner.

     I am a member of a group at present that gets by very well without an owner but the moderators can’t delete spam or change the group settings so that new members must be approved. We are plagued by, thankfully just, one spammer.

     I really don’t think the group should be deleted though unless there is absolutely no activity by non-spamming members for three months.

     Thanks, Jim

276. PostGuard said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 4:51 am

     Given that Yahoo is about to ditch 10% of its workforce, any system introduced to revive abandoned groups will need to be an automated process.

     There are hundreds of spam infested Yahoo Groups where it is obvious that they have been abandoned by the owner and taken over by spammers and so if a genuine request was made by a bona fide member then Yahoo should appoint the bona fide member as the owner.

     The other thousands of abandoned spam infested groups should be deleted so as the group name can be reused.

277. Beej said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 4:56 am

     I have to disagree with the idea of giving ownership to other members if the original owner has disappeared. There’s many reasons why the owner isn’t around.

     I agree with the comments where people are saying: Create your own groups!

     But seeing as how the overwhelming response is that people feel that groups should be transferred, then I’ll point out this part:

     “What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?”

     Simple. It goes back to the owner if he/she wants to come back. The owner is the owner even if the spirit of the group went on to other people. Like I said, there’s many reasons why the owner would disappear.

278. Beth said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 5:00 am

     -Alternatively, we are also considering giving group owners the ability to name someone as their predecessor should their activity/moderation be inactive for the specified time frame (similar to a living trust).-

     This. Sometimes real life gets hectic. Sometimes people have kids or unexpected deaths of those near to them. How long will “extended” be? Because if someone’s husband died and they disappeared for six months, it would be adding insult to injury for them to come back and find their games given over to some person on their list who happened to post the most because they were online all the time.

     I’m not saying that it would be right to let groups sit inactive because the mod just ditched, but in a virtual environment, it’s hard to know when someone has ditched or if their real lives are simply getting in the way of their virtual one… something that certainly no one should be punished for. At least if they could choose their successor from their co-mods or other list members, they would have some assurance that if life got rough, they might have the ability to come back. And I would assume that removing overnship from said person wouldn’t mean removing their moderator status? That way, again, it would facilitate a return if possible for them.

279. Oral ATAK said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 5:00 am

     Q: What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?
     My A: 30 days seems acceptable.

     Q: Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?
     A: Let Yahoo promote.

     Q: What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?
     A: Two of the oldest active members might be chosen.

     Q: What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?
     A: Hard to answer. If re-appearance occurs before a year, and if disappearance reason is e.g. an health issue, let the original group owner decide. Otherwise, let the new group owner decide.

     Q: What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below: N/A

     Kind regards,

     Oral ATAK

280. Duane said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 5:01 am

     Hmm, there’s a lot of good points here-

     If a group owner has a longtime bouncing email address, he/she is MIA.
     And, if the group is over run with spam and not many real posts, it’s abandoned.

     I would like to have the means to request ownership of certain groups that have truly been abandoned. I was able to take over a group before it was deleted and it is now thriving, spam free, and all the members are very pleased; I would like the opportunity to do the same with a few more groups for the sake of the Yahoo Groups community in the fields/topics that I’m qualified for.

281. Diana said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 5:02 am

     I own a very active group. If for some reason I’m going to be absent for more than a week from the group, I have 5 moderators who know where I am. Three of those moderators have my personal phone number and could contact me should I not check in with them in a reasonable time frame.

     About 5 years ago I was in the situation of joining a group where the owner had not actively participated for over 6 months. A lot of SPAM and ADVERTISING was taking place and it was very annoying. There were no appointed moderators. After Yahoo’s suggestion that I contact the owner, I did just that. After repeated attempts I finally received a VERY nasty letter from the owner stating it was none of my business how she ran her group. Therefore…..my new group came into existence and the old group finally disappeared.

     I believe every owner of a group should be required to name at least one moderator or co-owner. If an owner cannot be reached through email within 30 days, the group should be passed on to that moderator. If that moderator is unable to take over, then someone from the group should be appointed.

     Thanks for bringing up this subject, as it has been a thorn in my side for a long time and really needs to be addressed.

282. Leonardo Luz said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 5:17 am

     I have this problem in one group of mine. The owner became bouncing seven years ago, although he promoted me to moderator sometime earlier with constrained privileges. I would like to activate the SPAM function, but it requires more privileges that I have.
     So I enjoyed this guideline very much. I think four-six months of owner’s non-activity it’s a good time to send a notification and a month to answer it. I think moderator should take group’s co-ownership and in case the group hasn’t your criteria are fine.

283. JULIE LEVITT said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 5:17 am

     Feedback to your questions is below. First; my bio overview; Similar to others posting, I moderate or am owner of 6 yahoogroup lists for more than 6 years and have been moderating groups since late 80s in compuserve etc days…..One of my co-moderators died 3 years ago. The owner has been AWOL for 1 year+ but I keep it going. But what if I didn’t due to continuing declining health….

     What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted? 90 days esp for a high volume group, 180 days perhaps for low volume group. Should allow a mechanism for moderators(not owners) and listreaders to notify yahoogroups when someone notices a problem re owner? Also yahoo could possibly monitor when a particular group is getting a whole lot of spam/trash.

     Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?
     Group owner should have to name someone (for new lists being created and retroactive, yahoogroups should blast email to all moderators to click on a button and indicate who should be made owner if owner becomes inactive. i see the biggest problem with existing lists because you could make this step mandatory for new lists but how to handle retroactive.

     What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?
     If there is no named trustee and the owner never designated back-up group owners, then either a yahoo administrative email should appear stating the situation and asking for volunteers and their qualifications to become moderator.

     What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?
     The group owner would have been reduced to just a subscriber. If they reappeared AFTER the changes were made, then they would appeal to the new moderator to be added back as a moderator…I would hesitate to have them revert back to owner until the more recently named owner/moderator agrees…
     What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here?
     lists that are poorly moderated become breeding grounds for spam, people subscribing and then if sneaky black hat type person could do extreme damage to a long time list. There is a difference between owners who watch the list but choose not to review and edit messages before posted or who only monitor newer subscribers (holding messages till reviewed etc) vs who haven’t checked their list since its inception. this is a big problem on many lists and it would be great if you were able to put a mechanism in place for boards where the owner has disappeared, AWOL, or allowing the board to become a spam group.

284. Lydia said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 5:27 am

     * What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted? I think no longer then 3 months, after a month a active group can fall apart.
     * Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group? Only is the co-mod is willing and active.
     * What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?
     I think knowledge and understanding of that group is needed.
     * What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later? Let them help, do not return full ownership.
     * What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Of course you don’t want someone to steal a group, but if yahoo tries, members try and owner doesn’t reply and group wants to stay active and not loss there information then Yahoo need to step in and help.

285. Marion said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 5:42 am

     I like the idea of the owner naming a predecesser, but initially we don’t know our members well and members come and go. If the name(s) of the next person to take over the group could be added to the management area that would allow the owner to change it as needed. I know that I would not want my oldest and most active person running the group if something happened to me. She keeps trying to get me to change the way the group is run and move it away from what I want it to be. I do have another moderator who covers when I am unavailable. However, theses are not people we know well so choosing one might be difficult. On the other hand if the owner does not respond then obviously something is drastically wrong and the most active person has the largest investment in the group.

     I think 30 day for a notification to the owner is sufficient.

286. Rawcatalyst said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 5:46 am

     My group is not a generic group, its specific to my methods and teachings – the files are my copyrighted material and when I’m gone my group will cease to exist as I intended: A Support Group
     Therefore I do resist any dogmatic mandates that I must appoint a co-owner

     I am not adverse to the idea, that if it is known I am extremely ill or dead that members can poll to appoint someone to manage the group on a different footing or have it deleted after a year should one of the moderators I’ve appointed not be able to.
     I do NOT wish to be pinged monthly by Yahoo

287. Susan said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 5:51 am

     I belong to a group where the owner has been absent for years now. She refuses to name a moderator (although had one for a year without giving them adequate powers) and only pops in once in a blue moon. I used to send her e-mails to let her know when things were getting out of hand on the site, or when there were a lot of spammers, even suggesting that new members be moderated at first (I do this on my site). I offered many times to be a moderator, but since I own a group that is similar, and this person is very jealous, she refuses to allow me to take this on. Probably she is afraid I will delete her group or steal her members. Wrong.

     So based on this experience, and on my own running another group, I think that the notification period should be 30 days, and that Yahoo! should also track the owners’ activities once reinstated. An owner should be more active on the group – this could be measured by the number of bouncing members that have not been trimmed, or owner postings, or active moderation by the owner. In other words, if the owner just checks in once a month, it’s not adequate.

     I have been quite frustrated with some groups – trying to join or sending posts under moderation, where the owner is absent and there is no backup moderator.

     You might also consider REQUIRING that all groups have a moderator. This would force owners to consider their own actions and selfishness in holding on tight by themselves.

288. Vicki Short said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 5:57 am

     I would very much like something implemented as to where the person running the group can become owner when the original owner has gone MIA. I have been moderator of a group since way back when we were clubs, prior to 2002. The “owner” lost interest in the group (which was started in 1998) and made me moderator and then just didn’t come back. When we were in the process of converting to groups I felt if she was no longer willing to take care of the group/club, could she change my status from moderator to owner, so when I emailed her asking several times if she would make me owner she swore she had lost her Yahoo ID and no longer knew her password to even get into the group so there I was, never to be changed from moderator to owner. So I’ve been taking care of this one group for over 6 years w/o being able to have final say on anything. And it worries me that I can’t. Since then I’ve tried numerous times writing Yahoo asking them what can we do if the “owner” can no longer access the group to change my status even if she wanted to. So there I sit, a moderator instead of the owner.

289. Martin von Herrmann said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 6:03 am

     I didn’t have time to read all of the comments, so forgive me if this is already been said. I think some consideration needs to be taken into account for the differences in types of groups. I am currently moderating a small group for a local organization, which is essentially for announcements and meeting reminders. I am active enough to meet all of the requirements I have seen, but I know that the previous moderator did not check her e-mail as often, and might not have met some of the stricter requirements I have seen mentioned, even though she responded quickly enough for the needs of our group. I would think this would certainly need to be a group member initiated process as to which groups should be investigated for disappeared owners.

290. Charles Roberts said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 6:08 am

     INDEED, something should be done. Yahoo’s present position of “Contact the dead owner for their permission”, is of course ridiculous……and the other instances of Owner non-participation are equally in need of a viable solution. I joined a group a few months ago, that was started in 2002, but has been inactive since the Owner died in 2003……inactive that is, until I came on board. I was lucky enough to find an old inactive Moderator and convince him to de-spam the postings, and subsequently promote me to Moderator. I contacted the old Members and solicited new ones. The group is currently doing well, except we have no real Owner, and really do need one. Our group consists mainly of Members over 70 years old (me included)……, consequently we never know who’s going to be on board tomorrow. We really need some means so that inactive Owners can be replaced. You have many suggestions, from various points of view to draw on. I’m sure you will be able to assemble a good solution. Please do it sooner, rather than later. Thanks.

291. Alisha said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 6:13 am

     I’m the primary co-moderator of a very active group of over 1,300 members. Fortunately, the owner set me up with full moderator rights (except for the ability to delete the group) several years ago, but then she disappeared and her email has been bouncing all that time. I think that in cases where the email address is no longer valid (perhaps bouncing for 1 month), the moderator(s) should be given ownership or a new owner assigned. In cases where the owner email is valid and the owner doesn’t respond in 90 days, ownership should be extended to moderators.

292. Shadow said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 6:13 am

     Are we forgetting that some groups do not demand participation ? Some owners don’t interfere within group activities but manage from the background…………………………….
     Yahoo should delete any group within 6 months that is inactive if the owner does not respond to Yahoo’s email.

293. Cheri Alexander said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 6:14 am

     One of the groups in which I am solely a member has been abandoned more than 2 years. I’m not quite sure how long since the other two have been left by owners/moderators. I am the principal poster. I own/moderate a dozen or so group (also a member when it was clubs). These are all G-rated, family-friendly naturist/nudist groups yet we’re stuck in with Adult groups and therefore, get the most revolting ads. The advertising is why many of the groups get the inappropriate posts/spamming.

294. Jet Kamp said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 6:27 am

     I know how frustrating it is when an owner is no longer able or wanting to lead her groups without telling them or taking mesures for the group to continue. The result is often a new group. I’ve seen it done the right way too as I am on many lists as a member or moderator

     I do think that requiring a moderator, whose powers could be discussed could lead to a solution. Maybe a warning on the lists involved would be a wake up call for the members? I’m all for democracy in the groups so they should be able to discuss the situation amoung themselves.
     Jet

295. Tammi said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 6:27 am

     This has been a problem in our group. The owner handed the group over to a Moderator when he stopped being active. His email address was discontinued and when we tried to get the group ownership changed over this year – with the old owner’s approval and co-operation – we were unable to change the ownership, while going through Yahoos approved procedures.
     So I am glad you are working on the ownership issue and I think Yahoo
     should promote a moderator that exists within the group – if there is one.

296. syrraim said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 6:32 am

     As someone who deal with something like this in my offline life, I’ll say this:
     Attempt to notify at 30 and 60 days and at 90 days appoint one of the moderators co-owner. Failing that option, at the 90 day mark email all group members and let them chose a new co-owner and a moderator. All 14 days to do this. Delete a group after six months with no activity.

297. Kevin said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 6:43 am

     This is LONG overdue – glad it’s finally under consideration.

     One of the problems is that while a group could get migrated by starting another group, the old group still remains and generally ends up with tons of SPAM, and often numerous members.

     Q: What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?

     A: I don’t think it should be automatic. Some groups are almost self running, and the owner may not do anything for an extended period of time. They may also have moderators that do the day to day work, and the owner may not do much at all, so owner inactivity by itself should not be a factor.

     I think a complaint should have to be registered (a tool would have to be created to facilitate a complaint request). Maybe the complaint would require say at LEAST 5 or 10 members to digitally sign, that way one person can’t hijack the group. The form could contain the request for a new owner, 1 or 2 “voted-for” new owners, and several digital signatures/votes.

     Obviously the existing owner would have to be contacted first, given say at least 30 days, before the request is processed. Then an additional grace period of at least 15 days while the request is in progress before ownership is attempted. If the owner has multiple emails on file with that Yahoo ID, ALL should be tried, not just the one for that group.

     If the group has a trustee, then they would automatically become owner, and no voting would be necessary.

     A manual review of the group would have to be done, to make sure new group members weren’t added to skew votes – before making ownership changes. Maybe there would have to be a minimum membership time required to vote, say around 6 months or a year to help reduce illegal voting.

     Q: Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?

     A: I think it should be the Groups Decision (see next question)

     Q: What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?

     A: What about a Group Poll on that Group. The group knows who the regulars are, and who they would trust the most to own the group. Members who want to be the new owner could put their names (Yahoo IDs) onto the form, and the members would vote for them.

     Q: What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?

     A: If the owner is trusted, the existing owner would make the decision to allow them or not – so it shouldn’t be an issue. You could add a form that allows the old owner to apply to the group for their old position. Then the group can vote on it.

     Q: What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.

     A: The Group essentially knows what they want as a whole, so voting is always my first recommendation (as you can tell). I think hierarchy based on a members length of time with the group should not have much barring, nor should activity. Some members may have a lot of posts, and little to say, while others have little to say but bring a lot to the group. Members who have been there a long time, may not participate much, and may have basically abandoned the group but never officially removed themselves.

     In general, the group knows their membership best and should be making decisions as a whole. The only concern (as I mentioned above) would be someone adding themselves under multiple Yahoo IDs to skew polls and voting, something only a manual review would reveal.

     I LOVE the idea of having a trustee. I think that is an EXCELLENT idea, allow there to be more then one though. I think this would let owners who want total control to have it, yet have a facility to accommodate someone taking it over should something happen to the owner.

     This is a GREAT Idea!!!

     I think the “Trustee” option should go into affect as quickly as possible, so new and current owners can take advantage of this option.

298. jay vinton said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 6:43 am

     after two months use the the yahoo polling feature to give the group one month to pick a new owner.

299. S.V.Swamy said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 6:46 am

     I like the idea of Yahoo stepping in and save a group whose owner is missing. I also feel that there should be checks and balances to prevent the group being stolen by another activist in case the real owner is absent for a time, due to genuine reasons, esp. unplanned. So, Yahoo should make all possible efforts to contact the owner (a contact telephone number may be made mandatory so that even if the email is not working for some reason, the person can be contacted over telephone) and group owners should be encouraged to appoint a moderator and / or a co-owner, with the provision of the moderator being promoted to a co-owner in case of inaction from the owner.

     I am the owner of several groups, moderator of some more and member of many more groups. I too faced the problem of absent owners in a couple of groups and stopped visiting them.

     I wish I could come to the end of all the comments much more quickly than by scrolling down so much.

     Swamy

300. Jet Kamp said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 6:48 am

     No owner should leave her group uncared for, but there could be unforseen circumstances.

     1. Notify the group and give them time to respond.
     2.No reaction within 30 days, warning for delete.
     3. The eventual new owner should get all privileges.
     4. Require co-owner or moderator(s)

301. joe said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 7:08 am

     Here it is. The owner is the owner. If a group owner is inactive, then a member can start another group themselves and contact the other active members via email notifying them of the other group name.

     Unless an owner names a successor, the group should fade away as the owner did.

     It is a “get over it and move” on kinda thing.

     Any other way can jeopardize the whole concept of the group. Removing posts and members and the like.

     Can it be set up to lock in any existing rules or members or posts that was pre-new owner?
     I dont think so.

     Keep it simple.

     Send out a notice, delete group if no response within a set amount of time.

     joe

302. David Lewis said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 7:11 am

     A minimum for reply should be 30 days, and double that would be preferable. Perhaps a “successor owner” could be named by the owner. After the period of non-reply, the successor owner becomes the owner. Maybe even allow for more than one successor owner, in an order of priority.

     In your text, where you said “name someone as their predecessor” you should have used the term “successor.” I think this is the preferred approach, and in event of no successor named, go to some priority/hierarchy of list members.

303. Mark said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 7:18 am

     We were fortunate with the 323gtx group that, although they had become inactive, the former owners were able to be contacted and agreed to appoint one or more successors. We had an informal nomination process which resulted in two members being named Moderators. Eventually, we required Ownership status to take certain steps to fight the spammers, and the former owners appointed both of us as Owners.

     Our group may be unusually democratic, but it seems most abandonment issues should be able to be solved from within most groups. The group can decide when they’ve been abandoned. The group can decide who the successor(s) should be. The Poll feature could be used to show consensus and/or hold an election of sorts. My $.02 humbly delivered.

304. R N said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 7:40 am

     why not create a special moderator status that would provide the power to do everything that an owner could do EXCEPT: remove or ban owner from the group, and delete the group.
     That way, should the original owner resurface, he/she still has a group.

305. Kit said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 7:44 am

     Few legal processes take less than 90 days, an email groups’ ownership transfer should take no less.
     I think the process should require complaints from at least 3 group members, individually.

     That would assure that the complaint was legit, and not a takeover bid.

     After the third complaint comes in, Yahoo should attempt to notify the owner , and wait 90 days before taking action.

     At that point, shift a moderator, or the person with the most seniority/activity to co-owner, but as an *interim* measure.

     If the owner returns in the NEXT 90 days, s/he can bump the new interim person IF s/he names another current list member as replacement should s/he need to be absent again.

     If the owner does NOT return during the interim period, then the interim owner becomes the new owner.

     No group should ever be disbanded simply due to owner issues.
     If the members wish to begin a new group, of course there is nothing stopping them from doing so, but disbanding the group they leave behind simply because some old members choose not to follow them is fascist and petty.

     Let the group decide that for itself *after* the interim owner becomes the permanent owner.

     And a caveat of forcing a group to conform to the original purpose is silly.
     People change over time, as do their interactions. A group that formed to discuss knitting may now primarily discuss the member’s family lives.
     That’s not Yahoo’s business to censor.

     Those who complain that it took a *whole* day for a message to post seem to have little awareness that groups are not the entire life operation of thew owner- we sleep , go to work, and have lives, for heaven’s sake !
     This issue should concern only those occasions when an owner has been absent for several weeks, not a day or so !

306. Damian said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 7:49 am

     With one group we created we had the issue that we abandoned our group for personal reasons and removed/deleted the group, but later when we wanted to revive the group, the system would not let us re-use the original name.

     A good idea may be to (1) Notify the group owner/registrant of the inactivity. (2) If no answer, clear the group name from the database once inactive for >90 – 120 days and completely remove all references to it from the system.

307. Evilnine said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 7:57 am

     I understand that their may be reasons for extended periods of asbsence but in cases in which a group owner knows that they will be away they should be responsiblle enough to appoint someone to run it in their absence.

     I also understand about medical or other personal reasons that are unexpected.So the idea of a very long wait period does indeed seem fair,but we all know that bullies and spammers can cause major disruptions and even loss of membership in a relativly short time period.

     Due to this reason maybe after six months,and a request by members Yahoo! could grant temporary co-owner status according to whatever replacement guidelines are set.Then after an additional six months the temporary status could be made permanent,but still only as a co-owner.

     If after a year the original owner returns then the duties can be shared.In cases where the original owner returns to find that a bully or spammer has somehow gained co-ownership and is abusing the group then proof of this could be submitted to Yahoo! and if it is found to be true then that persons rights as an appointed co-owner could be revoked.

     This is why when appointing someone to take over they should not be given soul ownership but be made co-owner.

     This way if the owner does return they will not have lost their group and if they truly have abonded the group then they will never know the difference and at least someone has been appointed co-owner.

     I have my group set so that all new members have to have messages approved at first,once their intentions are clear I then manually change their individual setting so they may post at will.This virtually eliminates spam but if left unmoderated news member will never be heard.

     This is a problem indeed but I feel that this way existing members are garaunteed a spam free group until I return.

     This does not however address the problem of bullies.Discussions can get heated especially when the groups subject matter is serious such as politics or as in my case the study of WWI,without moderation debates turn to arguments and arguments escalate into fights,this can even happen to members in good standing if they are passionate about the subject.

     I think six months of neglect on an owners part is enough to warrant some kind of action but only if it is requested by group members.Even then,their needs to be some guidelines to prevent a bully or spammers from reporting this absence to gain ownership for less than noble purposes.

     A petition to Yahoo! by a pre-selected number of members would be a great way to control this.

     Example : if a six month period has passed with absolutely no owner contact and attempts have been made by members to contact the owner off line,then members could discuss this situation,on the group message board,and if a majority agree that Yahoo! should contacted then Yahoo! could provide a link where group members could sign a petition to have a co-owner appointed.

     Of course there will have to be a minimum number of names on the petition to prevent a single person from hostile takeover.After the petition has been “signed” by the required numer of members then it will fall onto Yahoo! to attempt to contact the owner either through a posted message on the group board or personal e-mail.

     Some groups are rather small intentionally so the number of required should be kept low,three to five,as long as it is more than one to prevent hostile takeover.

     Yahoo! can also,at this point,check to be sure the owner’s Yahoo! ID has not been inadvertantly or intentionally eliminated by a glitch in the system or the owner.

     Once Yahoo! has established that the groups owner still has an active Yahoo! ID and is mearly absent then a process to appoint a co-owner can be mandated.

     This will be another process entirely. In many cases where a moderator has already taken over the group and is running it responsibly then appoiting them co-owner is an easy decision.

     Also there may be a single member requesting co-owner status,Yahoo! could then post a message on the group stating their intention on granting this person co-owenership and allow other members a chance to provide any reasons why this person may not be right for the job.

     If more than one member is gunning for the job or someone disputes Yahoo!’s choice then Yahoo! could simply run an election via the groups poll feature.

308. Sharon Walker said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 8:02 am

     I think there should be a few ways to handle this.

     1
     Definition of abandonment: 24 hours of inactivity of a group
     Notification that ownership will be terminated: 48 hours (email sent to owner)
     Termination of ownership: 72 hours

     ***Even if no notice is sent at the 48 mark… at 72 hours termination of ownership will still go through. Sending a notice at 48 hours should be considered a courtesy, not a mandatory part of the process.

     2
     If the owner returns and states good reason why they were away from the group, the mods should vote to decide whether or not to bring the person back as owner. If the mods cannot decide, then a poll should be given to the group members to ask, by name, who they would prefer as their owner. A time limit of 48 hours should be given to finalize the poll.

     3
     Allow the previous owner to come back as a moderator IF all moderators agree that this is an acceptable action to be taken. Then, if the ownership spot comes open again, consider them for the position. (Also consider the fact that they abandoned the group once before, and ask them how they can assure the other mods that this will not happen again. Remembering of course that the others mods are here to serve the best interest of the group, not to give favortism to a previous mod/owner.)

     This may sound silly as a comparison, but I think we should treat the groups as if it were a responsibilty, much like a child, that someone must take care of. The best interest of the group should be the main priority…NOT the owner. I think that 72 hours is a good time frame for determining that someone has abandoned the group. (Much the same time frame is used when a child is abandoned.) The survival of the group is for the benefit of the members, not to cater to the owner.
     If the owner abandons the group, either intentionally or unintentionally, the group must still go on and keep functioning for the benefit of the members. If the origninal owner returns, they can state why they left and then come back as a moderator. If the opportunity to become an owner presents itself, then they should be considered and maybe allowed to return as owner. The fact that they previously abandoned the group should also be taken into consideration.
     Perhaps a poll should be taken to vote in an owner if there is a dispute? Let the members decide for themselves who would best serve their interests. It is afterall, their group.
     But, it should be remembered that unforeseen things happen. Computers malfunction, people get sick, people go on vacation… and no one wants to worry that their group will be destroyed or uncared for if they have to be away for an extended period of time. Hopefully, they would announce their intentions before taking leave for extended periods of time and arrange for someone to take over for a period of time, but if they don’t, there definitely needs to be a plan in place to ensure uninterrupted moderation of the group.
     With my group, I would much rather know that someone else would ‘take over’ and keep it going in the event that I would become MIA.
     After 24 hours of inactivity, all mods/owners should know that their mod status is subject to being investigated. Anyone else within the Freecycle (TM) group should have the authority to come in and moderate messages and basically function as a mod in this person’s absence.
     After 48 hours I think an email should be sent to the owner, asking if they are still wishing to be an active owner of the xxxFreecycle group…. and whether there is a response or not ….after 72 hours …someone else should be appointed in either a temporary or permanent capacity, whichever makes the most sense for the particular situation.
     My group is a perfect example. I am the ONE AND ONLY moderator. I, and the interm mods, have tried to recruit moderators, but members just do not seem interested. I still try.
     The one moderator that we did have in the past six months left quite a mess for us. I was named on the list as ‘owner’. She was a ‘moderator’. She decided, (after all my hard work), to take over as owner. She really made a mess of our group and sabotaged much of the work I had done. She was rude to members and basically locked me out of any moderating privilages with very little effort on her part.
     I was shocked, didn’t know what to do.
     I thought that since she was new that she did this accidentally. I was wrong. She was being malicious, yet, I was giving her the benefit of the doubt. As soon as I caught on to what she did I reported it to the interm mods and requested major help.
     Luckily, the interem mods were WONDERFUL and swooped in to make it all right again. The person was let go as moderator, and now we have a fake owner so that no one can do this again. I am functioning as a mod even though I am the only one. And …that is just the way I like it.
     My hope was, when I found that there would be two of us as mods, that we would work as a team, but it just didn’t work out that way.
     Hopefully, the next mod that is trained and comes on board will be a team player, not someone who wants to be a mod just as power trip or a shot to their ego. The group is where the spotlight should be. In my not so humble opinion, the mods should be as far in the background as possible until they are needed to serve the group in some way.
     The mission of Freecycle is what is important. The groups must survive for this mission to be realized. Owners deserve to be recognized for their hard work and dedication, but when they abandon groups, it should be dealt with as quickly and quietly as possible. Otherwise, we shake the confidence of the members, and send the message to them that the group is unstable, so they may decide to drop out of the group.
     Without members…. there is no Freecycle.
     Sharon Walker, FestusMO Freecycle(TM) Moderator

309. candy said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 8:03 am

     many people say..”stop complaining and start a new group.”
     problem with that is… when a new person does a search for a new group the largerest groups are listed FIRST in their search. and my newly created group will be last on the list! it will be new and not have any members and the old group that has been abandoned will have hundreds (due to all the spammers who join)…the new person who is searching for a group to join will join the old group (not knowing that it has been abandoned) and not even look to joining a smaller group!

     This happens all the time in my Hobby groups!
     i did start a new group…but it is slow to get new members because they join the bigger groups instead of my newer smaller group!!!
     they always end up complaining to the (absent) owner to remove spam and porn postings!!
     i try to explain that the group is abandoned and there is nothing to do about the spam, but they are welcome to join my cleaner spam free moderated group. they are joining…slowly!

     but if someone already started a group that has active members, then went MIA…why not let someone take it over and clean it up instead of going through the hassle of starting over???
     I have to stay a member of the old abandoned groups just to tell the new people the group is dead and to join the new one…it is a hassle and the old spam group never goes away!!!!!

     the old group needs to be deleted or Yahoo needs to allow a moderator/ member to take over as owner!!!!

     i wouldn’t do a poll for a new owner….or spammers will control all these abandoned groups and the cycle of spam will never stop!!

310. Peter said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 8:19 am

     All the comments above are good.

     First off members should have a way to choose a group owner if this should become a problem sure why not.There also might well be a group with almost the same topic could they be asked to take on the group if they had any intrest.

     Second I also think that a six month wait on activity is a good goal to reach for a notice to be sent.

     Third there could be an option to take a dead group and remove it all together or list them for other owners to see if there is any intrest in taking it over…. I tend to think this is a good choice.

     There are a lot of good groups owners as well as moderators an it is not right to punish all for a few bad apples I do think there should be set up after a group is formed a Super Moderator that could assume Co ownership and apply for full owner after three months of the date of six month review. That Said should an owner pass away go away what ever there will be you new owner.
     peter Group Owner and Group Moderator

311. Lynn said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 8:23 am

     1. I think the specified time frame should be fairly short, like two or three months. Then the owner is notified and has 30 days to respond. If the owner does respond, but goes AWOL for a second time for two or three months, that’s it, he’s out. IMO, even if a person is very ill, or in a bad accident or something, the group goes on. In three months, things can fall apart. A group should always have an active owner.

     2. Someone, whether one or more actual people, who would take over should be appointed from the beginning. It is not reasonable to expect that Yahoo could wade in and make a good decision about this. Face it, if you don’t know even one other person, you don’t have a group, right, so this should be quite possible, even for a smaller group.

     3. If you follow the guideline suggested in #2, this is irrelevant. If you don’t like the option in #2, poll the group. IMO, in no case should Yahoo appoint a group owner.

     4. If the original owner reappears too late, hey, it’s too late. Once an owner is removed that person’s rights are gone. You snooze, you lose.

     5. There should be a way to speed up this process if, say, a person dies. There should be a way to correct for lost IDs, Yahoo glitches, etc.

312. Pat said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 8:24 am

     My personal take is that group ownership could be set up better. Right now there are two levels – Owner and moderator. If there were three – owner, senior moderator, and moderator, things would flow more smoothly for transfer of ownership if the owner disappears. The owners would know that the responsibilities of ownership would go to the senior moderator (if there was no co-owner) should Yahoo be unsuccessful of contacting them after a six months absence. I believe any group with more than 25 members should be required to have either a co-owner or experienced owner to work as main moderator. Just my two cents.
     Pat S. in WA
     rosestamp1@yahoo.com

313. Jim said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 8:37 am

     The proposed quidelines look pretty good to me with minor tweaks and some specifics added.

     Period of inactivity – 60 days. Notify via email to groupname-owner and if that bounces, immediately create a co-moderator without the power to remove the owner. Retry contact with owner daily for 30 days and if unsuccessful, promote the co-moderator to Owner.

     Time allowed to respond – 10 days if the original notice doesn’t bounce.

     The selection criteria for a new owner look OK, but I suggest requiring acceptance by the nominee, then create a poll that runs for 10 days in which members will approve (or not) the promotion of the new co-moderator to full owner.

     Yahoo also needs a criteria for Owner replacement if the group is on autopilot and spammers/pests are taking over due to no screening of members and behavior.

     Note: All of the above aside, if the group is processing mail, it really isn’t that hard for members to communicate, agree to create a new group, select someone willing to run it and jump ship. Granted the message base will be lost, but files can be downloaded and re-uploaded, etc. The few abandoned groups I’ve run across lack someone willing to assume those duties so some care is needed in selecting a new owner from a pool of folks unwilling to take action to date.

314. John Novack said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 8:42 am

     This action is long overdue.
     One requirement, in my opinion, should be that ALL groups have at least two owners and one additional moderator.
     No one knows when their last minute alive might be, and who will take over a list upon their demise is probably not going to be their first thought if they even have the chance to take any action.
     perhaps x number of moderators per hundred members?
     Certainly if an owner disappears for whatever reason, promote from any moderator pool first.
     Scrubbing through thousands of groups will not be an easy task. Some groups that are very small and private set up for a specific short term might be exempt. Some groups that are “send only” such as the friends of Amtrak group might need to be handled differently as well.

     Just my opinions, don’t shoot the messenger!

315. Shariq Munir said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 8:46 am

     Finally…! a key issue addressed!
     I am saying this cuz i’ve underwent the same scenario! i’ve been an active moderator of this alumni network for nearly 2 years now.. i know several shortfalls of the groups, i need to removed certain spammers, introduce certain changes, move to groups beta but i can’t really do anything cuz i dont have ownership rights! i do hope that the new guidelines sort this out asap!

     as far as ur feedback request is concerned…

     * What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?

     i think a period of 6 or 8 months of inactivity should be enough to promote someone else to the co-owner status.

     * Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?

     it should DEFINITELY be someone from within the group unless or until the owner nominates a successor at the time of creation of the group. if the nominated person fails to take charge within 20 to 30 days, the ownership should be transmitted to someone within the group.

     * What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?

     naturally the new owner should be from amongst the moderators. in case the group has more than one moderator, the most active and the most policy-abiding moderator should be promoted as the owner. in case there are no moderators, the most active, non-spamming and positively-engaged member should be selected. seniority should be a secondary criteria in such a case.

     * What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?

     the original owner should not be relegated to the status of a regular member. the original owner should be expected to work in collaboration with their new co-owner. this should go on for a period of 3 or 4 months. if the original owner becomes active and engaging again, the entire ownership should be transferred back to them and the promoted co-owner should be relegated back to the moderator status (even if they were a regular member before that). If the restored owner becomes inactive again, the new co-owner should not be relegated to moderator status even if the restored owner becomes active after a few months.

     * What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.
     in case of a group that is related to an organization or movement, there should be some means to make sure that the person being promoted as the new owner is really connected with that organization and not just someone forwarding messages, posting random emails and participating in random discussions. even though he is positively engaged in the group and not a spammer, he still does not deserve to become the owner of a group that revolves around an organization that he is not a part of!

316. Brandi said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 8:48 am

     I really like Gary’s suggestion posted on October 21, 2008 @ 4:19 pm. That process is similar to what happens when a meetup group is abandoned on meetup.com and it seems to work pretty well.

317. Kim said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 8:55 am

     I am so blown away by what I’ve been reading. At what point did Owners become employees of their members? If I open a group I choose the name, I choose the category, I choose the rules, I operate the group accordingly and give it the time I have available. If someone joins and doesn’t find this to their liking they are free to unsubscribe and try another or start their own as they see fit. If I didn’t run my groups properly then they wouldn’t be the success they are, so I’m more than well aware it takes more than just a good Owner to make a group. I’m simply stating that this is something I’ve created and if people are unhappy for whatever reason they are free to go elsewhere.

     Furthermore, Yahoo cannot be depended upon to manage this process effectively. We see this almost every day with mail that fails to get through, spammers who aren’t blocked, hackers that take over accounts/groups and even this thread. Despite my asking this thread to notify me of responses it has yet to do so. Please tell me where my faith in Yahoo should begin?

     I say that if an Owner is an Owner then it’s their choice. Anyone who is still sitting in a group two years after the group has gone dead and is subjecting themselves to spam clearly needs to review their decision, not ask Yahoo to step in like some big brother and take over the group. I would NEVER remain in a group where spam was being permitted nor sit in a group that had no activity – I’d start my own.

     Also, why not change how the groups are set up. No one should be permitted to enter any group without authorization of the Owner – that would take care of the spamming. No group should probably exist (although I hate stating this) without having someone appointed as a Moderator. This Moderator should be able to do everything with the exception of deleting the group and the Owner, with only the Owner having the ability to override them. That would resolve any issue with spamming or allowing new members.

     Should a policy be put in place that my members get to dictate how often I’m there, what I do, when I show up and have the ability to “vote me out” and take what I’ve built up I will have no hesitation in moving all my groups out of Yahoo and encourage others the same. This is like going into a pub and you wind up disliking the Owner. You don’t get to “vote him out” and run the bar your way, you simply find another pub more to your liking. It’s exactly the same here. I don’t remain in groups that are badly run, I doubt that half here do. I still stand by the fact that if you are unhappy with a group you’re a member of, leave and start your own. Many don’t.. do you know why? Because running a group takes tons of time, hard work and effort. I’ve had many members tell me they couldn’t do what I do.. on the other hand, I’ve had to deal with some not-so-nice individuals that would not hesitate to attempt to take over the group should something like this be made available. After all, it’s quite easy to take over someone else’s work than start yourself. I lack both the time and inclination to sit here if this ridiculous tail wags dog policy comes into effect.

318. Harry said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 9:04 am

     First, since groups range from private or very-special-interest groups, with <5 members to many thousands, with a similar span of number of posts, I don’t think there can always be a “one size fits all” approach as far as requiring a successor-owner, or even moderators, or how long the various waiting period should be.

     Second, I don’t think Yahoo can or should interject themselves into a group, or delete a group, without being requested to do so by the group’s members.

     After reading every post so far (yikes! but terrific input from all), I think this one by “Christopher” is so sensible that I’ll take the liberty of repeating it. Hope that’s OK.

     From http://www.ygroupsblog.com/blog/2008/10/21/request-for-feedback-new-abandoned-groups-guideline/#comment-76469

     “Automating the process.

     “I can appreciate that Yahoo is going to want as automated and fair of a system as is possible. To that end, I would suggest that any existing group member can click a link on a group’s home page that can launch the ORP (Owner Replacement Process). When an ORP is launched, the Group owners, moderators and members are notified of the ORP and who launched it. The existing group owner(s) will have 30 days to respond to automated inquiries via email and owner specific links on the group’s home page. If they don’t respond within 30 days, a poll is automatically posted on the group and the existing members get to vote for who they want as a new group co-owner.

     “After another 30 days, if the existing group owner(s) still have not responded to Yahoo’s automated inquiries, the poll is closed and the winning group member is promoted to group co-owner. The ORP takes 60 days total and if the existing owner(s) respond at any time, the ORP is cancelled. Otherwise the new group co-owner can then establish other co-owners, moderators and modify moderator delegated authorities. They will not be allowed to delete the old group owner or modify their group membership. During the ORP, there will be an additional home page link present that would allow group members to report any ORP abuse attempts. During the ORP voting poll time period, all members will be promoted to unmoderated message status so all members will be able to discuss the situation and make suggestions for who the new co-owner should be or to campaign to become the new group co-owner.

     “This approach should minimize the Yahoo support burden as well as create as fair of a system for assigning a new group co-owner as might be possible.”

319. Janet said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 9:16 am

     The owner shold be required to name a successor should they become unavailable or face the possibility of the group being deleted if abandoned. There should be a miminum membership (size) requirement for that.

     Q: What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?
     A: I would say 4 or 6 months because life can get busy at times.

     Q: Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?
     A: Email the owner asking what their plans are for the group. If they respond that they plan to return, great. Otherwise ask them to either close it or name a successor if they have not already.

     Q: What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?
     A: There is not set rule for deciding who would be best as a moderator. Just because a person runs other groups doesn’t make them right for the group in question. Neither does age or time in the group or number of posts. On top of that, what if the person who is on the most really doesn’t have the time or interest to own it? It needs to come from the owner. If the owner does not name someone or their email bounces, then I would ask for volunteers and let the list decide between them.

     Q: What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?
     A: Perhaps the ‘promoted’ person becomes a super mod, just a step below the owner in case the owner comes back. The owner will still own it.

     Q: What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we haven’t addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.
     A: How do we figure a way to decide if something is abandoned? RL issues can be sudden and take weeks or months to resolve. However, if the owner dies it is quite obvious something needs to be done and one shouldn’t have to wait. In those cases, the ownership should change and not be a co-owner situation. In any case, the selection of the new co-owner needs to be done carefully and IMO by the group to prevent bullies or undesirables from taking something over.

320. Shona Brock said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 9:17 am

     As a co owner in 2 different groups, with 2 totally different topics, i dont feel that either of our groups would ever qualify for this problem, as there are 3 owners in both groups.

     I have belonged to groups where the owner was absent most of the time and the mods ran the group. In that case, I can see removing the owner or bumping the owner down to mod status, or even making on of the mods an owner til things are dealt with.

     I have left several groups that were barely hanging on, less then 5 emails a month, that in my opinion was just a waste of time, which is the reason i left.

     I would say, if the owner ( if there was only 1) were to be absent for more then a month, (unless emails could prove they were on vacation or dealing with an illness or death in the family, or loss of internet) Then someone who was a mod should be placed in the owners seat for a while. Either until the original owner came back, or proved they were never coming back.

     If there is more then 1 owner, then those left to deal with the group should have the right to either remove the absent owner, or leave them there, as they choose.

     MOST owners care enough about their groups to either kill the group when they have to be away or hand it over to someone who cares about the group and its members. I do understand, as i have seen in other groups, that some owners simply dont care.

321. Glenna Juilfs said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 9:40 am

     I was a member of a group where the owner had lost access to the owner options due to a change in email address. There were no co-owners or moderators. We got inundated by spammers with no way to effectively deal with them. We formed a new group and had the members transfer to it. This was a case of a lot of activity, but not necessarily good. Apparent inactivity can be deceiving, however. For example, I own a group which is the on-line home of a correspondence fan club. We usually communicate with each other in other ways than through the e-group, so there is little or no activity seen on the group. Hoever, I do post special notices, photos, links, etc on the egroup. Therefore it is an important site to have even though there is little apparent activity. The notices to the owner (me, in this case) with response resulting in no changes made, is a good thing.

322. Carolyne said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 9:49 am

     I have a situation that I do not believe has been addressed. The subject is with regard to groups where almost no messages are sent — but truly are active due to the nature of the group. I run a free genealogy class on Yahoo. We go months, or even a year or more, without a post because I have set it up for complete privacy for all members — unless they post a question directly to the list.

     I would not want Yahoo to think that the list is inactive simply because they don’t see messages posted.

     With regard to abandoned groups — where reports of abandonment and/or porn issues have been sent in by members — have you considered making owners of groups provide you with a snail-mail address so you have a method of contact when there are email issues? Even if you didn’t get a response, you would have documentation that you tried.

     In general, it would seem you could require all new groups to have at least one extra moderator in addition to the original owner. Give the new groups time to do that — say within six months.

     With regard to appointing new owners for what appears to be an abandoned group, be sure to leave the old owner a method of access to the group should they return. and some method to regain control. Perhaps they are serving in the Armed Forces.
     So I do not think the original owner should be removed in “abandonment” cases.

     In some cases, people set up a group merely to use for email address gathering and actually are violating the terms of service. You really need some people to investigate claims of that nature and act on them quickly. I don’t know how you would manage the manpower to do this sort of thing, unless you set up some kind of volunteer program. But then, how would you screen the volunteers?

     Good luck on a complicated issue.

323. Peggy Chinn said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 10:19 am

     I think this is a very good policy!

324. David Clulow said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 10:21 am

     I run the Adenium group. I took over around 3 years ago when the owner died. When I took over we had around 1,600 members we now have over 3,000 and last month we had over 1,100 posts.
     The owner’s daughter was a moderator and she made me a moderator but did not know her father’s password. Therefore he is still listed as owner and I as a moderator. I would like formally to be made the owner. How can I do this? I have appointed 3 other moderators around the world and do little moderating myself but keep everything in order.

325. Karen said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 10:24 am

     I own quite a number of groups. I have been involved in groups where either the owner lost their yahoo ID, or just failed to figure out how to change email addresses.

     I, too, like Christopher’s suggestion as very practical, fair, and group oriented
     http://www.ygroupsblog.com/blog/2008/10/21/request-for-feedback-new-abandoned-groups-guideline/#comment-76469

326. Brenda Nolen said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 10:25 am

     I feel 6 months total is enough time (break that up as you will … 4 months of no contact, 2 months to respond UNLESS the owner’s email account has been bouncing for that amount of time or longer).

     As for who to give ownership to, post a message to the group. Give members a month (Requests sent once a week for interested parties to contact Yahoo). If only one person responds within that time frame, they get the job. If more than one, judge by length of membership and content of messages + amount of participation. If no one responds, delete the group.

     Prior to implementing this change in policy (more specific than just a notification of a change in the TOS), send an email out to all members of Yahoo Groups. If a group has been inundated with spam but the members hope one day the group will return to its original purpose, many members just go “no mail”. They should be given a heads-up so they know to look for Yahoo’s message on that group.

327. larry hagedon said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 10:28 am

     I have experienced two problems with orphan groups. The usual one is of course, death or dislocation of an owner with no established moderators that can keep it running smoothly. Those soon become inactive and/or fill up with porners and spammers. Many are simply replaced with new groups. the old group just sits there taking up space.

     Another one is seasonal orphans. A seasonal subject, in this case Morel mushroom hunting, can be abandoned for 10 months of the year and can fill up with porners and spammers. Come next spring it can spring to life again, for another 2 month run.

     larry

328. Barbara said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 10:54 am

     I am a sister in the truth and have lost you guys since I got my computer fixed.

     Help

     can I get you all back?
     Barbara in GA

329. alan cocks said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 11:32 am

     For the period when a co owner is forced promoted, the new co owner should be bound by the existing group objectives and any terms, but not be able to delete the group. After a suitable stated period, subsequently, the delinquent missing owner should be forced demoted to normal member status because responsibility should be clear, with no doubt about what would happen in the event of the absent owner returning later.

     A big advantage of yahoo groups is the clear ownership situation.

330. D C Rose said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 11:46 am

     I monitor the Oscar Wilde sites for professional purposes. One of these (oscar_wilde-1800s) is completely inactive save for the rare spam, another (thegreencarnation) has lots of posts, but only advertsing sexual services. This has gone on for a very long time. Both started off as serious Wilde sites, but neither now have the remotest connection with, though still listed under, Wilde — for a while even ahead of my own serious Wilde site. The conclusion I draw is that once Yahoo management has its attention drawn to an abandoned or derelict site, it should have the capacity to suspend it, perhaps after consultation. Incidentally, I do not seem able to unsubscribe from thegreencarnation.
     DCR

331. RS said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 11:53 am

     Christopher’s idea is great! I had the same idea myself on my blog somewhere, but his is stated much more clearly, and succinctly. It has my vote.

     I should like to clarify one previsou point I made about owners who go silent losing rights to their group. I think an owner who simply goes quiet should have the option to resurface and regain his/her group with an appeal. However, an owner who is hard bouncing or has left the group ownerless has no further rights, in my opinion.

332. Irene Kraus (ComputerLady) said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 11:59 am

     This is indeed a serious topic, and one I am thrilled to see Yahoo Groups addressing in a more active way! I had to ‘close’ one of the longest running groups I’d been managing (started on some other service that thru buy-outs and mergers eventually came to Yahoo Groups) as the owner died several years ago. To resolve the issue, my fellow remaining moderator and I had to create a new group which is still active. But, it was sad to walk away from that archive of messages and so forth that went back so many years.

     As an active member of ListHelp (group dedicated to managers of discussion lists, forums, etc.), I’ve also seen this topic come up on a frequent basis. In fact, I wrote up a summary of some of the advice those of us in that group had been saying – that was found to work – in my own blog here:

     http://www.design-comp.com/orphaned-group-recovery

     In a nutshell, I have advised people to document – within an orphaned group – attempts to contact the group owner, and wishes (assuming the owner is non-responsive) as to who should take over ownership. In scanning the comments made here, I see many have made suggestions quite similar to my own in so far as this process. (Glad to see so many of us are thinking along the same lines!)

     As to time frame for an owner response… That’s a harder issue to pin down. If the group where VERY active, I would certainly expect there to be a response within 30 days. I would be willing to extend a longer period of time for less active groups, to say 6 weeks to 2 months. That is, if these attempts to contact the owner include messages to not only the stated owner-address for the group, but whatever e-mail addresses are attached to the profile/ID of those listed as owners in the group.

     Next point, who should be nominated as the new owner… Assuming the group has a moderator, I would certainly support that person being named as the new owner. The thing is, in so many of these groups where this occurs, there usually isn’t a moderator appointed. Yahoo’s suggestion to pick out the most active contributors to a group is a good idea, IMO, but I have an additional suggestion there…

     In my advice article, I mention using the POLL function of a group to conduct a ‘vote’ amongst those in a group as to who they want the new owner to be. As Yahoo is going to be doing this, and could obviously access that function when no one else in the group had that ability, why not make that the method of choosing the new owner? In groups where there isn’t a moderator, for example, pick out the top 5 or 6 top contributors into the group, list them in the POLL and ask members to vote for whom they want to be made owner. Yahoo can also encourage these named persons to post statements – into the group – as to why they should be made the owner, their plans for the group, etc.

     Set a deadline for when voting will start and end, which I would base – again – upon the activity level of the group. Time line for voting in more active groups should (IMO) be shorter than for less active groups. This should follow the same rules set down for owner contact. Members of the group would have to be reminded they have to log into Yahoo’s system to cast their votes, with perhaps guidelines for those who’ve never created actual Yahoo IDs/Profiles. (If they have joined a group strictly by e-mail, they will not be able to use the web function aspects of the group.)

     That summarizes what I would think would be a fair and open system of managing such issues.

333. Bert Kaplan said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 12:10 pm

     Owning a group requires impeccable responsibility to its members and the entire concept of “groups”. Since no one person can know if he/she will be around tomorrow, I’m quite surprised that groups have been permitted to have only one owner. We learn from history and we’ve had enough history to know that owners disappear from the scene either irresponsibly or because reasons beyond their control. Either way, the one owner groups is vulnerable.

     After our group suffered the unexpected move of its owner, he appointed another owner in his place. Since then, two additional owners have been appointed, thereby guarding against the possibility of unexpected abandonment of a site. Even vacations don’t result in interruptions of service. Consequently, I strongly advise that every group have at least two owners. Current individual owners should be required to appoint another owner by a certain date, and new groups must list two owners to start with.

     I ought to add that our owners are regularly in touch with one another when issues of policy arise, and fill in for each other as necessary. Differences of opinion are allowed, of course, but must be settled before a policy is established.

     I hope this helps.

334. Emily Jackson said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 12:27 pm

     I think allowing an owner just 30 days to “show up” is a bit strict. I once was seriously ill for over 2 months and was unable to moderate or approve new members for that period of time. Perhaps the limit should be 6 months.

335. Ms. Pointe said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 12:28 pm

     Due to how one may not have internet access for one reason or another on a steady basis, at that given time, I recommend that Yahoo provide the opportunity for us to put in either our own personal/business phone number or a number provided by Yahoo through Skype. Should one choose the Yahoo provided Skype Out number, then we should be required to put in either a land line or a cell phone number of ours that calls to that provided number be forwarded to. A bonus of such option and requirement is that it allows for group members to be able to contact the owner/staff by phone, if desired and needed.

     I 2nd the Express option for the groups with no activity (not even a log in) by the Owner in a month and half time where there is no moderation of activity by any of the moderators (if any appointed) and is filled with spam galore. Yahoo should start moderating posts — not approving any spam — immediately and start a voting poll for all members to choose whom they want as Assistant Owner (to test him/her out as Owner over the next month) and as moderators. The Assistant Owner elected official will have complete group access, except for closing of group, the ability to take away the archives, and the banning of members. He/she must report spamming members to Yahoo for them to confirm the spamming activity of such member and ban them from the group for X time. While Yahoo is confirming the spamming level and degree, said member(s) will be temporary group suspension (a member but not able to have any of their activity posted to group).

     ** If Owner is bouncing for more than 2 weeks, once reported for Express Assistance of Group Needed, then Owner will be banned from group and banned from starting another group for 6 months. The 3rd ban of said Owner will lead to ??? punishment by Yahoo/the government/the police.

336. Anonymous said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 12:29 pm

     There isn’t anything wrong with the system the way it is.

     Think of a new group name! Invite the participating members to the new group, then, ditch the spam group.

     There, was that so hard?

     An owner can add co-owners and moderators to take care of business in their absence. The rules are fine as is! If they choose not to…. SO?? As long as there are no TOS violations it shouldn’t be an issue. If there are, report them and go through the process that’s in place for that.

337. Rob said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 12:35 pm

     WE NEED SOMETHING LIKE THIS!!! I am a member of a few hobby related groups where the owner has been absent for years. The groups are wide open (they were started YEARS ago) and have been taken over by spamers and pornsters. It would be GREAT if Yahoo would allow us to transfer ownership. It could be given to one of the long-time active members.

     Yes, we need this! Make it so!

     Rob

338. Sherry G said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 12:36 pm

     This would be a good solution for a group that has the owner pass away or become incapacitated in some way. I think the first choice should be a replacement selected by the original owner. If there isn’t one, a moderator should be offered the position, maybe in order of membership. I think the time frame need could vary from group to group.

     If a person disappears from their group, I don’t think they should be allowed ownership back unless the group agrees upon it.

339. Robert C. said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 12:40 pm

     Glad it sounds like Yahoo is on the verge of coming up with a solution. I’ve had a problem with a group that’s been full of SPAM for 6 years now, along with some nasty pictures. I run a replacement group that has gone quite well but this old one is still around.

     The owner has disappeared but the big hang up is that this group has no poll capability on it so we can’t get a new moderator for it. So it just sits there with no solution.

     This case is extreme since it was a normal group but it’s so full of spam it’s been put in the “adult section”. But I still get emails about the content on it sometimes and there’s nothing we can do about it.

     In my case it wouldn’t be hard to figure out a good “trustee” since there are two of us who have run the new group for over 5 years. I’d say a trustee would be someone who has run another page for a while. Giving it someone who hasn’t run a group before might just lead to the same problem of it being abandoned again.

     Looking forward to a solution.

340. discodamon said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 12:46 pm

     I agree with some of the earlier posters… There needs to be a way to fast-track a new moderator in the case where at least 6 mos – 1 yr have gone by. For instance, my moderator died. I don’t feel comfortable approaching his family about switching over ownership to me (although I am acting as moderator.) Why should my group have to go through a protracted process?

341. Susanne said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 12:52 pm

     I agree with others. You will have a big mess if you try to usurp an owners rights by arbitrarily promoting someone to authority over a group. The oldest or most active members are not always the best choices for moderators.

     The members who are bright enough to start a new group, inviting all the members from the “Lost Owner” groups to join, have the right idea. That would be my choice too.

     By posting messages to the “Lost Owner” group members, via the groups messages, may be the best way to let the members and the owner know what is happening.

     If Yahoo wants to take responsibility for making any changes to a specific group, they will be adding so much more work to their plates.

     If that is the path Yahoo takes: The groups could notify Yahoo, by sending notice that their owner/operator of the group has gone missing, with no one to approve/deny or ban members and their messages. But only after there has been no contact with the owner for more than 90 to 120 days. After all, we all have computers crash (with no other computers handy), natural disasters that wipe out homes and/or family emergencies and illnesses.

     Still think the best option is for someone in the group to start up a new group and invite members to join them somewhere that hasn’t become stagnant.

     With respect,
     Susanne F.

342. Andrew Broad said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 12:56 pm

     * Time-frame: one year (or set up a system whereby Yahoo! can be notified of the Owner’s death). Certainly not less than one month.

     * The Owner shouldn’t HAVE to name a Trustee, but the ability to do so should be added to Yahoo! Groups.

     * If the Owner has appointed Moderators but no Trustee, then each Moderator should be promoted to co-Owner. Participation should NOT be an automatic criterion for promotion, as it could easily go to a spammer! Another criterion might be whether messages require approval. If messages from NEW members require approval, then the Owner should at least be someone with unmoderated posting-privileges.

     * If the Owner reappears, (s)he should retain Ownership, and have the ability to demote the Owners that were crowned without his/her consent.

     * Maybe appointing a new Owner is going too far. Maybe there just needs to be a Moderator with the ability to approve or reject messages, depending on the Group’s moderation-policies.

343. Robert said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 1:07 pm

     What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?

     6 months, but the person should be given provisional co-owner status for a
     period of 6 months to a year prior to gaining “ownership”.

     Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?

     If there is a successor listed then the group should go to the successor, if not then the most active moderator (from a group maintenance perspective) should be promoted.

     What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?

     If there is no successor, and no moderator, then the successor should be nominated and voted by the membership.

     What should happen if the original group owner does reappear, months, or even years later?

     Difficult to say and harder to make a rule for. I guess that after some period (2.5-5years) full irrevocable ownership should go to the successor.

     What other concerns or suggestions do you have that we have not addressed here? Please share with us by commenting below.

     My concern is the definition of “inactive”, that should mean “unreachable” and completely”non-responsive”. If the owner says, “I’m here, and I own the group and it is run the way I want it run”, then neither members nor any organization should have any right to usurp the owner.

     In addition, some rule to establish a quorum of the membership that has been active within a recent period should be established.

344. Carole McDonnell said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 1:09 pm

     I am a great believer in getting two good friends or a participator to be co-moderators to each of my groups. I give them power to do everything except delete the group. Sometimes I have three moderators. It helps. I think a group should be considered dead if the owner goes missing for nine months. Then yahoo could send a note to the owner, once a month and wait for another 3 months for the answer. If owner doesn’t answer, then that makes a year of absence. I know of one group where the owner kinda laid low but she was nursing her dying husband. Also know of a couple of other groups where the owner passed the group on to others. But life happens. -C

345. Jay said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 1:10 pm

     I agree with most of what Ron said, October 21, 2008 @ 4:17 pm

     1. Time frame: 4 months. 2 inactive months to notification, then 2 months without response before promoting a co-owner
     2. Promote a moderator from within. Do not force a group to have a co-owner. Some groups may not work properly with a co-owner, such as for a family mailing list.
     3. ??
     4. I say 6 months being time limit for reasserting ownership
     5. Have an option for Moderators as Successor #
     i.e.: Successor1. Best successor, but might have left when Owner did
     Successor2. Second best

     If there are no successors named, use Moderators.

346. Guilherme Doval said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 1:11 pm

     I believe that issues concerning to content or new group directions imposed by the owner is a personnal issue that the owner shall have the everlasting right to rule on his group.

     Taking over an owner should only concern to lack of activity. On my group, in which I am a moderator, the owner has passed away long ago. There should be some objective criteria and authomatic tools to solve issues like this in short time, such as lack of activity in a given time. Therefore, if in a given time the owner does not send a message, upload a file or any other ordinary member activity, or do any moderator activity, oe of the moderators (the older) should authomatically earn owner status for a provisory but indeterminated term, until the original owner show up again.

347. Ladybug said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 1:13 pm

     Please create a method of consolidating two groups.

     I was asked by a more responsible group owner to take over her group when she left town, because I had a similar one. There was no way to consolidate the two groups, so I had to go through the grueling and time consuming process of capturing each email address and adding it to my group. If there was a way to consolidate two groups, it would be so much easier! There is still a third group I have to consolidate as well, but havent had time.

     Sometimes groups splinter and then re-consolidate or similar groups discover each other and want to join forces.

348. Scott Scowcroft said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 1:14 pm

     Up front at the time a group is originally formed, I think an “owner” should have an option of “opting-out” of agreeing to an orderly transferance of power for reasons such as abandonment. Potential members then should be made aware that if they sign-up, they do so at their own risk and with that understanding.

349. Gene Climer said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 1:17 pm

     I think Yahoo staff could consider having a Yahoo staff member automatically registered as a co-owner of every group. This staff person would be a silent co-owner with no ecomonic interest in the Group. However, this person would have the responsibility and tools at their disposal to monitor their groups, and to take action when necessary. This position could be taken over by someone assigned by the Group Owner, or in lieu of this assignment, could be assigned by Yahoo. Just a thought. Gene

350. Bill Callahan said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 1:19 pm

     I’m very much in favor of using a democratic process to select a new owner, should the existing owner fail to do the duties necessary to keep a group active. I view the group as being more like a civic organization than as business. If a civic organization’s president failed to come to meetings or do the other duties for the organization, then the organization would nominate and elect a new president.

     The amount of time that someone is absent from their duties is hard to determine. I think that it may be one of those things that may have to be set up with an initial “best guess” value, and then adjusted according to experience.

     If old owner shows up after a new owner has been elected, then I think that the membership could decide to have a vote to determine who should be the owner.

     It might also be possible to use different rules depending on the setup of the group. For instance, a group where new members need approval to join a would probably do well to use a democratic process, since it is unlikely that spammers or “group stealers” would gain approval. Open groups are harder to deal with, by comparison.

351. CJ said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 1:20 pm

     First of all, I think it’s GREAT that this is finally being addressed. I’m in a couple of groups that are nothing but spam farms now — none of the legit members care to post around all the spam.

     I would think an absence of 4-6 months should trigger the initial contact. This allows for people who do have temporary set backs as other people have mentioned — family crisis, medical issues, or whatever. If the e-mail bounces back, go right to the next step. If it doesn’t bounce back, allow 30 days for a response.

     As for who to promote to co-owner, if there’s a moderator who is still involved with the group, that person seems like a good first choice. But I agree with some of the other posters that simply promoting someone who has posted a lot isn’t good. That could easily promote a spammer in many cases. A post to the group to solicit a volunteer would be a good option. If more than one person volunteers maybe there should be some tie-breaker options such as length of time with Yahoo, or ownership of other groups.

     I’d say that after that long an absence, an owner who later returns would do so as a co-owner and that status would remain. Anything else would be left for the Group to deal with.

     I don’t know that “requiring” a moderator would work in all cases, but maybe the Group sign-up information could be adjusted to STRONGLY RECOMMEND at least naming a moderator or two, if not a co-owner.

     Looking forward to the changes!!!

352. E said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 1:24 pm

     What is the criterion for an abandoned group? Must a group member report it to Y YG?

     Or pending members/messages going untouched forr X amount of time?

     NO WAY should a YG staff member auto,tically be a member of groups! That’s a great way to get “Big Brother” involved!!

     Sorry if I have typos – this interface doesn’t seem to be working with my browser.

353. Ms. Smith said,

     October 22, 2008 @ 1:25 pm

     This is a necessary and long over due guideline. There are cases where a group owner is inactive and so is their yahoo ID and email! I would think that in this case the promotion to ownership from within the group could be expedited, because it should be VERY easy to see and prove when this happens.

     # What should the specified time frame be that a group owner is absent before someone else within the group be promoted?
     -> This will be a source of contention, but I would think 6 months of inactivity on the owners part is fair.

     # Should Yahoo! promote a moderator that exists within the group or should the current owner have to name someone who will take over in the event they go inactive when they start the group?
     -> If the current owner has completely disappeared from the yahoo network (ID and email address inactive) then this is not possible. If a co moderator exists, then yes, that person should be promoted.

     # What other criteria should we use for deciding who becomes the group owner in a situation where there is no active moderator or “trustee”?
     -> Yahoo or it’s designee should pose